USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Secondary world history teachers' integration of technology into the classroom

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Secondary world history teachers' integration of technology into the classroom a mixed-method approach
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
Whitworth, Shelli A
Publisher:
University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla.
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Research
Computers
Schools
Social studies
TPCK
Dissertations, Academic -- Secondary Education -- Doctoral -- USF   ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Abstract:
ABSTRACT: In the social studies classroom, using technology, students may gain access to expansive knowledge, broaden their exposure to diverse people and perspectives, and engage in critical thinking activities necessary for citizenship education (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Berson & Berson, 2003; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; NCSS, 1994, 2006; Risinger, 1996; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). 21st Century Skills are valuable for students as they examine vast amounts of content relating to historical events, figures, societies, technological growth and examine the relationship of the content to today's global interactions. Research indicates that there remains a call for documentation of exemplary uses beyond that of research and basic presentation tools (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Kopkowski, 2006; NCSS, 2006; NEA, 2004; Technology Counts, 2006; U.S. Department of Education, 2004, 2005; Whitworth & Berson, 2003).^ The continued need for research in the field should address the intersection of content, current effective technology practice, and pedagogy of innovative uses of technology in the classroom while offering a model or steps for use (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Berson, Lee, & Stuckart, 2001; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Braun, 2002; Bull et al., 2007; CUFA Opening Session, 2005; Diem, 2000; Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; McGlinn, 2007; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; NCSS, 2006; Shulman, 1986; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). This study examined the types of technology being used in secondary World History classes and how they are being integrated. The study utilized a mixed-method approach using a survey instrument, Perceptions of Computers and Technology, designed to measure the types of software and integration of technology use in classrooms.^ Written responses and follow-up of randomly selected cases served to provide complementary data to elaborate and clarify results from the quantitative portions of the analysis (Hogarty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003).
Thesis:
Dissertation (Ph.D.)--University of South Florida, 2007.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
System Details:
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Shelli A. Whitworth.
General Note:
Title from PDF of title page.
General Note:
Document formatted into pages; contains 105 pages.
General Note:
Includes vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 001969560
oclc - 272690294
usfldc doi - E14-SFE0002246
usfldc handle - e14.2246
System ID:
SFS0026564:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Secondary World History Teachers’ Integration of Technology into The Classroom: A Mixed-Method Approach by Shelli A. Whitworth A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement s for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Secondary Education College of Education University of South Florida Co-Major Professor: Michael J. Berson, Ph.D. Co-Major Professor: J. Howard Johnston, Ph.D. John Ferron, Ph.D. James A. White, Ph.D. Date of Approval: November 1, 2007 Keywords: research, computers, schools, social studies, TPCK Copyright 2007, Shelli A. Whitworth

PAGE 2

ii Acknowledgments I’d like to thank my husband, who is my best friend. He has always believed in me and has been my biggest su pporter in completing my doctoral program. This dissertation would also not be possible without the emotional support of my family, friends, and coll eagues. Thank you all for understanding the hard work and long hours that I put in over the past few years. Writing a dissertation is not an i ndividual endeavor and is done so under the supervision and guidance of a dissertat ion committee. I’d like to thank Dr. Michael J. Berson, Dr. J. Howard Johns ton, Dr. John Ferron, and Dr. James A. White for your thoughtful comments, sugges tions, and support in this process. I’d especially like to thank Dr. Michael J. Berson for mentoring me through the entire doctoral program. In addition to my doctoral committ ee, I’d like to thank Dr. Tony Onwuegbuzie, Dr. Kris Hogarty, and Tom Arnold for their input on the mixedmethod design, procedures, and analysis. Thank you to Natalie Keefer and Tom Lowenthal for serving as raters of the qualitative data. Thank you to Jessica Howard and Casey Carver for assisti ng with data entry and locating articles. Thank you to Natalie Keefer, Jennifer Gr oendal, Geri Scafidi, and Aimee SheaAlexander for looking over the document and for your thoughts and suggestions. I could not have completed the proj ect without your time and effort. I also extend my appreciation and gratitude to Dr. Brbara Cruz, Dr. James Duplass, Dr. Stephen Thornton, and Dr. Jane Applegate for your support and the professional opportuniti es offered to me through re cent years, as well as to Dennis Holt, for his assistance and support as a colleague in the doctoral program and in the data collection process in the School District of Hillsborough County Schools (SDHC). I also am grateful to my colleagues and friends in the SDHC for their support, professional opportunities, and especially friendship throughout the completion of my doctoral program.

PAGE 3

i Table of Contents Acknowledgements List of Tables iii List of Figures iv Abstract v Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study Introduction 1 Context of the Problem 2 Statement of t he Problem 2 Purpose of the Study 3 Research Questions 4 Definition of Terms 4 Resources 5 Limitations 6 Organization of Remaining Chapters 7 Chapter 2: Review of the Related Literature Technology Initiatives 8 Technology Standards 10 21st Century Skills 11 Technology in the Social Studies 14 Diffusion of Technological Innovations 20 Summary 22 Chapter 3: Methods Participants 24 Research Design 24 Instrumentation 25 Procedure 26 Quantitative Analysis 28 Qualitative Analysis 29 Quantitative and Qual itative Analysis 30 Chapter 4: Results Introduction 32

PAGE 4

ii Quantitative Results 33 Participants 33 Question 1 36 Question 2 40 Qualitative Results 44 Question 3 46 Textbook Technology Support 55 Additional Results 57 Summary of Quantitative and Qualitative Results 57 Chapter 5: Conclusi ons and Recommendations Purpose of the Study 59 Research Questions 59 Significance of the Study 60 Procedures 60 Discussion of Findings 61 Types of Software (Question 1) 61 Types of Integration (Question 2) 62 Lessons and Activities (Question 3) 63 Interpretation of Mixed Data 63 Limitations 67 Recommendation for Future Research 67 Summary 70 References 73 Appendices Appendix A: Data Collection Timeline 86 Appendix B: Researcher Script 87 Appendix C: Packet Cover Sheet – Instructions 88 Appendix D: Informed Consent Form 89 Appendix E: Survey Instrument 90 Appendix F: Open-Ended Questions 95 Appendix G: Rater Ca tegories Sheet 96 Appendix H: Member Checki ng & Interview Script 97 Appendix I: Teacher “A” sample project 98 Appendix J: Teacher “D” sample projec t 99 Appendix K: Teacher “F” sample proj ect 100 Appendix L: School District Approval to Collect Data 101 Appendix M: Exempt Certif ication IRB Approval 102 Appendix N: Budget 104 About the Author End Page

PAGE 5

iii List of Tables Table 1 Participants’ Descriptive Data 35 Table 2 Classroom Descriptive Data 36 Table 3 Types of Software Used to Complete SchoolRelated Activities (by Teachers) 38 Table 4 Types of Software Used to Complete SchoolRelated Activities (by Students) 39 Table 5 Integration of Computers In to the Classroom 41 Table 6 Types of Software Used to Complete SchoolRelated Activities (by Teachers): Co rrelation Matrix 42 Table 7 Types of Software Used to Complete SchoolRelated Activities (by Students): Corre lation Matrix 43 Table 8 Integration of Com puters Into the Classroom: Correlation Matrix 44 Table 9 Reported Lessons, Activities, and Projects and Integration of Computers 47 Table 10 enGauge 21st C entury Skills and NCSS Technology Standards 50 Table 11 Technological Pedagogical C ontent Knowledge 66 in World History

PAGE 6

iv List of Figures Figure 1 Technological Peda gogical Content Knowled ge 14

PAGE 7

v Secondary World History Teachers’ Integration of Technology Into the Classroom: A Mixed-Method Approach Shelli A. Whitworth ABSTRACT In the social studies classroom, using technology, students may gain access to expansive knowledge, broaden t heir exposure to diverse people and perspectives, and engage in critical thinking activities necessary for citizenship education (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta 2004; Berson & Berson, 2003; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; NCSS, 1994, 2006; Risinger, 1996; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). 21st Century Skills are valuable for students as they examine vast amounts of content relating to historical events, figures, societies, technological growth and examine the relationship of t he content to today’s global interactions. Research indicates that there remain s a call for documentation of exemplary uses beyond that of research and basic presentation tools (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; K opkowski, 2006; NCSS, 2006; NEA, 2004; Technology Counts, 2006; U.S. Department of Educati on, 2004, 2005; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). The continued need for resear ch in the field should address the intersection of content, current effect ive technology practice, and pedagogy of innovative uses of technology in the cla ssroom while offering a model or steps for use (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Berson, Lee, & Stuckart, 2001; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Braun, 2002; Bull et al., 2007; CUFA Opening

PAGE 8

vi Session, 2005; Diem, 2000; Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; McGlinn, 2007; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; NCSS, 2006; Shulman, 1986; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). This study examined the types of technology being used in secondary World History classes and how they ar e being integrated. The study utilized a mixed-method approach using a survey in strument, Perceptions of Computers and Technology designed to measure the types of software and integration of technology use in classrooms. Writt en responses and follow-up of randomly selected cases served to provide comple mentary data to elaborate and clarify results from the quantitativ e portions of the analysis (Hogarty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003).

PAGE 9

1 Chapter 1 Introduction to the Study Introduction In the 1990s – 2000s, tremendous am ounts of funds, research, and national initiatives drove the purchasing of technology for schools and a rising concern for the expenses of technol ogy (Cuban, 1994; Cuban 1999; Jones & Paolucci, 1998). However, in recent y ears, the widespread proliferation of technology use in society has shift ed the focus from cost and access to technology to examining how technology is being used to afford students opportunities to develop skills necessary to be technology and information literate and successful in the 21st century (C EO Forum, 2000; ISTE, 2006; NCREL, 2003; U.S. Department of Education, 2005) Social studies content and teaching strategies that require higher order or cr itical thinking yield promising grounds for innovative uses of technology to develop 21 st Century Skills. However, there is a need for research in the field that addr esses effective practice and pedagogy of uses of technology in the classroom as linked to 21st Century Skills and the NCSS (2006) technology guidelines (B erson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Berson, Lee & Stuckart, 2001; Bolick, Mc Glinn, & Siko, 2005; Braun, 2002; Diem, 2000; Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; NCSS, 2006; Whitworth & Berson, 2003).

PAGE 10

2 Context of the Problem A review of the literature in social studies and social studies education reveals that there is an emergence of exam ples of model uses of technology in classes consistent with 21st Century Skills highlighted in national standards. Articles and resources on incorporating the use of the World Wide Web into classrooms are most preval ent while indicators of uses of technology for communication, drill and practice, simu lations, information databases, use of geographic information systems (GIS), and videoconferences and digital video are emerging (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolic k, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). This study serves to add to the empirical data and to guide social studies teachers in their efforts to infuse technology into their classes. The study utilized a within-stage mi xed method (simultaneous approach), which allowed the resear cher to mix quantitativ e and qualitative research approaches during data collection phases and the data analysis stage (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). The intermethod approach used in this study provided a concurrent-nested design th rough the administration of a survey that contained both closed-ended (quantit ative) and open-ended questi ons (exploratory, qualitative; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003) to form triangulation of the data. The qualitative data provided co mplementary data to el aborate and clarify results from the quantitative porti ons of the analysis (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). Statement of the Problem State and national initiatives have placed a tremendous emphasis on the use of technology in the classroom as a means to ensure that students develop

PAGE 11

3 21st Century Skills necessary for a technology-based society (Florida Department of Education, 2000, 2002; Inte rnational Society for Technology in Education; 2000; National Council for A ccreditation of Teacher Education, 1997, 2000; U.S Department of Educ ation, 1996). Critics claim there is little research offering evidence of effective methods of technology in teaching and learning yet agree that new skills for the 21st Century Skills are essential for students (Bitter, Garten, Oppenheimer, & Ot to, 2004; Cuban, 1999; DeWitt & Horn, 2005; Jones & Paolucci, 1998). Recent trends indicate that social studies classrooms are using technology to enhance 21st Century Skills through Internet use, technology for communication, drill and practice, simu lations, information databases, use of GIS, and videoconferences and digital video (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Berson & Berson, 2003, 2007; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Lipscomb, Guenther, & McLeod, 2007; NCS S, 1994, 2006; Risinger, 1996; Vincent & van’t Hooft, 2007; Whitworth & Berson, 2003) Yet, there remains a need for documented model uses of technology in social studies education and social studies teaching in order to diffuse tec hnological innovations (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; K opkowski, 2006; McGlinn, 2007; NCSS, 2006; Rogers, 1995; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to ex amine what types of technology are being used in secondary World History classes and how they are being integrated. This study served to add to the empirical data and to guide social studies teachers in the use of technology not only as a learning tool but to assist

PAGE 12

4 and encourage other educators in their ow n endeavors to incorporate technology into the curriculum. Using the instru ment, Perceptions of Computers and Technology (Appendix E), designed to meas ure both teachers’ perceptions and use of technology in their classrooms, in combination with the qualitative inquiry of selected cases, the st udy utilized a mixed-method approach. Selected case studies served to provide complementar y data to elaborate and clarify results from the quantitative portions of the analysis (Hogar ty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). Additionally, the study offers a review of technology standards and initiatives, 21st Century Skills, technology in the social studies, and diffu sion of technologica l innovations. Research Questions The study addressed the following research questions: 1) What types of software, hardware, and/or Internet tool s are being used by World History teachers? (Quantitative) 2) With what types of teaching met hods are computers integrated in the classroom by World History teachers? (Quantitative) 3) How are lessons and activities c onducted with computers by World History teachers? (Qualitative) Definition of Terms Digital-age literacy : 21st Century Skills necessary to be a productive citizen in today’s world, with an em phasis on understanding information in a variety or forms. Digital-Age Literacy inclu des basic literacy, as well as scientific, economic, technological, visual, informati on, multicultural, and global literacy

PAGE 13

5 (NCREL, 2003, p. 15; NCSS, 2004; SCORE, 2004). Closely linked to digital literacy is Cyberliteracy (Gur ak, 2001). This is the need for critical thinking skills unique to interpreting Internet and elec tronic communication in the digital world (Gurak, 2001). Technology literacy : According to enGauge 21st century skill, the knowledge about what technology is, how it works, what purpose it can serve, and how it can be used efficiently and effectively to achieve specific goals (NCREL, 2003, p. 22). Technology infusion or integration : Meaningful computer use by teachers and students related to curriculum cont ent areas (Eisenberg & Johnson, 1996). Additionally, technology use that supports the essential social studies skills as set forth by NCSS, NETS-S, and 21st c entury learning: acquiring information through “reading, study, reference and in formation search skills and technical skills unique to electronic devices and organizing and using information thinking, decision making skills” (ISTE, 2007; NC SS, 2004, 2006; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). Resources This study employed the survey inst rument, Perceptions of Computers and Technology (Appendix E). The in strument was designed to measure teachers’ perceptions and reported use of technology in their classrooms and was field tested and then administered in a district wide assessment that yielded 2,156 participants (Hogarty, Lang, & Kromre y, 2003). A small bu dget of $387.00

PAGE 14

6 was necessary for copying the survey and for postage for return packets and for incentives (Appendix N). Limitations The proposed research design included potent ial threats to internal validity in both the qualitative and quant itative portions. Threats to internal validity might include the following: (a) history because events out of cont rol of the researcher may impact the use or cease the use of technology by participants; (b) attrition however, for the follow-up case study data collection, every effort was made to reach participants to complete the follow-up data, including visiting them at their schools; and (c) r esearcher bias as prepared scripts and written instructions were used when administering the survey materials to reduce researcher bias and so that the study could be easily replicated (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). The following threats to external validity were considered: (a) Population validity relates to generalizing to the popul ation from which the sample was drawn, and the findings from this st udy may not generalize to the entire population of World History teachers in this district as there may have been a bias or predisposition to technology use or concerns that prompted the sample population to participate, and (b) researcher bias, as noted above (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). Furthermore, to establis h credibility in the proposed study, the researcher conducted peer reviews of qualitative responses to examine and reduce experimenter biases, assumptions and logic regarding the interpretation and identification of themes in the qualit ative data (Creswell, 1998; Maxwell, 1996; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998).

PAGE 15

7 Organization of Remaining Chapters The remaining chapters present a re view of the existing research and literature and the proposed methodology. C hapter 2 details the research and literature including technology initia tives and standards, 21st Century Skills, technology in the social studies, and di ffusion of technologi cal innovations. Chapter 3 outlines the research methodol ogy and procedures to be utilized in the proposed study. Chapter 4 present s the results of the study as they pertain to the posed research questions. Chapter 5 summarizes the study and discusses the implications of the findings. Recommendati ons of further research projects are also outlined.

PAGE 16

8 Chapter 2 Review of the Related Literature This study examined the types of technology being used in secondary World History classes and how they are in tegrated into learni ng and instruction. The study added to the empirical data and to guidelines for social studies teachers on integrating technology into the World History curriculum. This chapter reviews technology initiatives, standards, 21st Century Skills, technology in the social studies, and the diffusion of technological innovations into teaching and learning. Technology Initiatives The use of technology in classroo ms has been advocated by the U.S. Congress in order to afford students oppor tunities to prepare them for the 21st century (U.S. Department of Educ ation, 1996, 2000a, 2004, 2005). The 2000 National Educational Tec hnology Plan included, as one of its goals, the emphasis on students gaining technology ski lls and information literacy skills or 21st century literacy to ensure appropriate and responsible use of technology in an increasingly technology-rich world (U.S. Department of Education, 2000a). The goals included information problem-sol ving skills, such as how to define tasks, identify information-seeking stra tegies, locate and access information, determine information's relevance, organize and communicate the results of the information problem-solving effort, and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency

PAGE 17

9 of the solution. In recent years, the federal governm ent recognized the potential of technology in schools to enhance critical 21st Century Skills, resulting in an expanded national plan. The 2004 National Educati onal Technology Plan in cluded seven action steps to help districts prepare student s for future success: (a) strengthen leadership by encouraging technology par tners and a community relationship for planning technology goals; (b) consider innovative budgeting; (c) improve teacher training; (d) support E-learning and virtual schools by making these options available to all st udents and encourage faculty traini ng in these areas; (e) encourage broadband access 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and maintain the system for quality use; (f) move towa rd digital content in classroom; and (g) integrate data systems across schools with in districts (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). Nati onal organizations and professional education organizations, as well as school distri cts, continue to develop initiatives, standards, and training to ensure the infusi on of technology in the classroom as a means for students to develop 21st Century Skills. In October 2000, the Fl orida Department of E ducation (FLDOE) approved the Educational Technology Plan Fram ework for the State of Florida (FLDOE, 2000). One of the goals within this plan was “to enhance the impact of technology on student performance” and that “all educators will master and model educational technology standards as established by the Department of Education” (p. 4). The revised October 2002 plan included the goal to “improve learning opportunities for students th rough the appropriate integration of

PAGE 18

10 educational content delivery systems and inst ructional tools into the curriculum” (FLDOE, 2002, p. 1). One of the foci within this goal is to “establish educational technology standards for the certificati on of teachers,” which would involve collaboration with “colleges of education to ensure that pre-service programs prepare teachers to meet the educational technology standards” (FLDOE, 2002, p. 5). Efforts to ensure that important 21s t Century Skills are met have resulted in national technology standards and accredi tation for teacher education programs, as shown in The National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) Project of the International Society for Tec hnology in Education (ISTE, 2000). Technology Standards The NETS-T project provides “teac her education programs with standards describing what new teachers shoul d know about and be able to do with technology upon entering the classroo m” (ISTE, 2000; NETS-T, 2006). The NETS project with the National Council fo r Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) and the Internati onal Society for Technolog y in Education (ISTE) developed NCATE-approved National Stand ards for Technology in Teacher Preparation and National Accreditation fo r programs in educational computing and technology teacher preparation (NCATE, 2000). The accreditation emphasizes that teacher education programs “provide adequate access to computers and other technologies, and expect faculty and students to be able to use it successfully” (NCATE, 2000, p. 1). Through Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers grants, resulting research se rved to create “national consensus on what teachers should know about and be able to do with technology activities”

PAGE 19

11 (NETS-T, 2006). In their cont inual efforts to stay abreast of the latest technology and skills necessary within our society, at the 2007 annual Nati onal Educational Computing Conference, ISTE announc ed they will embark on a year-long process of revising and enhancing NETS-T. Additionally, ISTE developed six st andards for students in the classroom or NETS for Students (ISTE, 2006, 2007) These provide a framework for teachers when designing lessons and activiti es including 21st Century Skills. The cnets.iste.org website offers a comprehensive online hub to share NETS, by offering guidelines to teachers, students, and administrators on meaningful uses of technology, by sharing research, and by offering links to model practices across disciplines to assist in further di ffusion of model innovations of technology use in education. In June, 2007 ISTE announced NETS Refresh. The standards for students outline necessary 21st Century Sk ills for life in an ever increasing, technology-based digital society. 21st Century Skills The efforts of educators as well as federal, state, and private agencies to encourage use of technology in the classr oom stems from an increasing need for students to possess the ability to think cr itically and make decisions about vast amounts of information accessible through technology. These are skills that are necessary as a 21st century student and a future active citizen. The six ISTE revised standards guide teachers in develop ing activities that afford students opportunities to learn life skills un der the following six categories: € Creativity and innovation € Communication and collaboration

PAGE 20

12 € Research and information fluency € Critical thinking, proble m-solving, and decision making € Digital citizenship to understand hum an, cultural, and societal issues related to technology € Learning technology operations and concepts (ISTE, 2007). During a 2-year compilation of res earch on nationally recognized standards and skills, analysis of business and i ndustry, and educator input, the North Central Regional Educational Labor atory (NCREL) developed enGauge 21st Century Skills (NCREL, 2003). These skill s are closely linked to NETS for students, teachers, and administrators. Yet, NCREL (2003) broadly details four dimensions that are crucial 21st Century Sk ills: digital literacy, inventive thinking, effective communication, and high productivity. Digital-aged literacy skills are noted as necessary beyond those of basic reading, writing, and math and emphasize proficiency in “science, technology, and culture and understanding the information in all its forms” (NCRE L, p. 15). The forms included in digital literacy are basic literacy, scientific litera cy, economic literacy, technological literacy, visual literacy, information lit eracy, multicultura l literacy, and global awareness. Inventive thinking placed an em phasis on the necessity of learning higher level critical thinking skills as a re sult of our increasing technology-based world. Inventive thinking skills incl ude those of adaptabilit y/managing, selfdirection, curiosity, crea tivity, risk taking, and higher order thinking. Effective communication is reported as essential in a media-based world and a necessary skill in the workforce. These skills incl ude teaming/collaborat ion, interpersonal skills, personal responsibility, social/c ivic responsibility, and interactive communication. High productivity is a category of competencies needed in

PAGE 21

13 today’s’ workforce and includes prioritizi ng, planning, managing, the use of real world tools, and the ability to produce relevant, high quality products. Each dimension correlates the necessity of each skill to recent societal and economic changes, both nationally and globally. In the field of social studies these dimensions most closely relate to usi ng technology to enhance critical thinking skills, through the use of computer tool s for research, problem-solving, and decision-making tools. In the social studies classroom, spec ific teaching methods when paired with the use of technology afford students opportunities to explore content and practice both 21st Century Skills and critical thin king skills that cannot be done with the textbook alone. T he use of technology specif ic to content and social science pedagogy can be further examined through the work of Mishra and Koehler (2006). The author s highlighted how the use of technology in the classroom has become a unique 21st century pedagogical approach (Figure 1). In the technological pedagog ical content knowledge (T PCK) model, the authors expanded on the work of Shulm an (1986). They underscored the interchangeability of technological tools of choice, content, and pedagogy (TCP), yet contended that the nature of the forms of technology in use today yield a new teaching strategy. This added dimens ion highlights the changing role of technology with content and pedagogy. The us e of technology tools with specific social studies content and teaching methods has become a technological pedagogy that yields learning outcome s that enhance content knowledge and enhance 21st Century Skills.

PAGE 22

14 Figure 1 Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Note. From “Technological Pedagogical Content Kn owledge: A Framework for Integrating Technology in Teacher Knowledge,” by P. Mish ra and M. J. Koehler, 2006, Teachers College Record, 108. Technology in the Social Studies 21st Century Skills promote higher order thinking skills necessary for citizenship education in a digital age. T he National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) and social studies education progr ams promote critical thinking skills which, when paired with NETS for student s, afford students opportunities to develop 21st Century Skills, such as analyzing a wide variety of information while working with peers on projects and decis ion-making tasks (ISTE, 2007; NCSS, 1994, 2006). The NCSS (1994) holds “Exp ectations for Excellence,” whereby learning requires students to connect prior knowledge to new knowledge to engage in problem solving, evaluation, and making informed judgments. NCSS believes that information literacy is an e ssential skill for “acquiring information,

PAGE 23

15 reading, study, reference and information s earch skills and technical skills unique to electronic devices and organizing and using information thinking, decision making, and metacognitive skills” (1994, p. 1). In the field of social studies, tec hnology and digital literacy are supported by NCSS standards and themes (Ber son & Berson, 2003; NCSS, 1994). Additionally, the enGauge 21st Century Sk ill of information literacy encompasses a broad effort guided by the concerns of the explosion of information now available on the Internet and in digital fo rm. Digital literacy advocates stress the importance of teachers a ffording and facilitating students’ opportunities to engage in active, self-directed learning activities by looking beyond their classrooms for resources on the Internet that will enrich the learning environment (NCSS, 2004; SCORE, 2004). Berson and Berson (2003) highlighted how cyber safety, digital awareness, and media lit eracy serve to enhance analysis and evaluation skills, affording opportunities to develop critical thinking and problem solving when dealing with vast numbers of resources and multiple perspectives. More specifically, Berson and Berson ( 2003) reported that digital literacy provides students with opportunities to dev elop the following critical 21st Century Skills: (a) global and multicultural sens itivity to information and cultures; (b) critical analysis and decision-making skills when disseminated information is compiled; and (c) appropriate use of copyrighted material and legal issues surrounding use of protect ed or unauthorized computer space (Berson & Berson, 2003). The current NCSS (2006) Technology Position Statement and Guidelines maintain that integrating technology in social studies is critical in fostering active

PAGE 24

16 citizenship skills by affording students extended learning opportunities, experiences using technology in cont ent context, avenues to explore the relationship of science and technology on society, and the acquisition of skills to access political-action-related sources. In a recent nationwide survey of registered voters, 80% responded that students in our nation’s schools should learn 21st Century Skills, such as critical thinking and problem solving, computer and technology skills (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2007). In the field of social studies, technology can serve many more functions in the classroom than merely accessing information and has the potential to enhance students’ critic al thinking skills and problem solving skills (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta 2004; CEO Forum, 2000; Diem, 2000; Mason, Berson, Diem, Hicks, Lee, & Dra lle, 2000; NCSS, 2006; U.S. Department of Education, 2005). A review of the publ ication trends in the field of social studies indicated that m eaningful technology use depends on constructivism and student-centered learning (Becker & Riel, 2000; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Doolittle & Hicks, 2003). For educators to take advantage of the technology available, the technology must be infused more into the instruction, modeled as a tool for citizenship skills and historic al inquiry, and not used as a mere appendage during one or two lessons (B erson, 1996; Mason, Berson, Diem, Hicks, Lee, & Dralle, 2000; Wh itworth & Berson, 2003). Whitworth and Berson (2003) conduct ed an exhaustive review of more than 300 articles, reports, chapters, and boo ks pertaining to technology use in social studies education, teaching, and l earning. The authors reported that much

PAGE 25

17 of the literature consisted of articles providing Intern et resources, as well as lessons and articles offering an overview or historical review of technology in the social studies without specific model le ssons or activities (Beal & Mason, 2001; Bellan & Scheurman, 1998; Krupnick, 1998; Wilson, Rice, Bagley, & Rice, 2000). The authors acknowledged a slight emergence of activities that enhance civic competence and critical thinking skill s while using Internet resources such as telecollaboration, webquest activi ties, and lessons requiring that students critically evaluate content they encount er on the Internet. Furthermore, they highlighted a need for the “sharing and dissemi nation of effective ways” to “use technology in social studies classroom s that enhances social studies education (according to the NCSS standards) that goes beyond merely accessing information on the Internet” (Whi tworth & Berson, 2003, p. 484). Berson and Balyta (2004) offered a re view of the trends of technology use in social studies and analyzed the current movements and the potential future of diffusions of innovative uses of technolog ies. The authors reported that uses of technology in the social studies rest in the areas of drill and practice, simulations, communication tools, and accessing vast amounts of information and resources. Areas reported by the author s to have advanced in use in classes included indepth supplemental materials for texts, exploring current ev ents, communication tools for online writing and discussion communities, and constructivist-based activities involving accessing and interpreti ng digital materials. Berson and Balyta (2004) reported slight emer gence of model uses but emphasized that teachers still need “examples of methods th at they can model” (p. 146).

PAGE 26

18 Bolick, McGlinn, and Siko (2005) o ffered a thorough revi ew of publication trends up to 2004 in Social Education a National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) publication. They r eported that the majority of technology-related articles in Social Education pertain to the Inte rnet and specific software uses. They underscored the emergence of uses of geographic information systems (GIS), databases, handheld computing videoconferenc ing, and digital video. They reported that the articles reflect a “changi ng role of the teacher and learner, one that depends on constructivism and student-c entered learning” (Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005, p. 160). The final call wa s for more published articles on model classroom uses of technology. In the field of social studies and te chnology use classroom, there is a need expressed in the literature for Wo rld History classes to supplement textbooks with information from the Inter net that addresses globally related nonWestern content. Newmark (2000) highlight ed the profound “disparity that exists between course titles and course content ” that faces teachers of K-12 World History topics (p. 1). The author noted t hat, traditionally, educational products were Western or Euro-centric in cont ent. Furthermore, Stearns (2006) pointed out that as the world has become more globally interactive, a need has emerged for teachers to cover non-Eurocentric c ontent to offer perspectives on global relationships. As Advanced Placement (AP) World History courses and curriculum debates have challenged the traditional content of World History classes, there now exists a need for acce ss to multimedia resources to obtain non-Western content (Newmark, 2000). Si milar findings were reported by

PAGE 27

19 instructors of World History at the co llege level. For example, Kelly (2006) reported that student learning with digita l media “transfers control over the exploratory aspect of learning from the in structor to the student ” (p. 2). This is consistent with 21st Century Skills for students and the construc tivist nature of learning with technology stressed in nati onal initiatives (Dolittle & Hicks, 2003; NCREL, 2003). The persistent theme acro ss the literature was that technology used in the social studies field has the potential to enhance 21st Century Skills. Much of the research in World History teaching and learning with technology, as well as the larger social studies readership, pertain s to accessing resources on the Internet. There remains a call for model lessons and activities in the scholarly field that highlight technology integrat ion (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; NCSS, 2006; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). The field of social studies hi ghlights uses of technology for communication, drill and practice, simu lations, information databases, use of GIS, and videoconferences and digital video (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). Reviews of research indicated that technology does have an im pact in classrooms, both on technology literacy and teaching and learning content (Becker & Riel, 2000; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Diem, 2000; Dolittle & Hicks, 2003; Ke lly, 2006; McGlinn, 2007; Metiri Group, 2006). While the field has experienced a growth in publications pertaining to using technology in social studies classrooms, there remains a need for both quantitative and qualitative research to asse ss the integration of particular types

PAGE 28

20 of technology into social studies classrooms and how lessons are used to enhance 21st Century Skills (Bennett & Be rson, 2007; Bolick, Berson, Friedman, & Porfeli, 2007; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko 2005; Diem, 2000; Mason et. al., 2000; McGlinn, 2007; Saye & Brush, 2007; Whit worth & Berson, 2003). Such data may serve to substantiate the use of technol ogy not only as a learning tool but to assist and encourage other educators in their own endeavors to incorporate technology into the curriculum. Diffusion of Technological Innovations The very idea of using technology in innovative ways is a social change or a new way of thinking about social st udies pedagogy (Rogers, 1995). It is the process of transforming teaching and lear ning through the use of technology for student-centered learning and constructivistbased activities that enhance critical thinking (Dolittle & Hicks, 2003). Diffusion is the process of “communicating an innovation over time through certain c hannels to members of a given social system” (Rogers, 1995, p. 5). For an innovation to yield further diffusion, it must elicit some positive advantage for the user(s) (Rogers, 1995). There have been debates in the literature as to what exactl y is the positive advantage or the best way to use technology in the cla ssroom (Cuban, 1994, 1999; DeWitt & Horn, 2005; Healy, 1998; Postman, 1995, 2000). So me critics assert that technology will not enhance teaching beyond what can be done without it and will not transform teaching (Cuban, 2002; Postman, 2000). Furthermore, Postman (2000) argued that using technology may make reading, writing, and use of books obsolete. Innovations should only relate to cultural change and human progress

PAGE 29

21 as content but not necessarily as t eaching methods (Postman, 1995). Others contend that technology will not trans form teaching methods, especially the teaching methods of strong veter an teachers (Cuban 2002; DeWitt & Horn, 2005). Rather, technology should be used as a tool to assist students in making informed choices and to make topics mo re meaningful (DeWitt & Horn, 2005; Dolittle & Hicks, 2003). Research indicates that technology, when used to construct knowledge or in a constructivi st teaching model, is more readily adapted to classroom use and can yield both benefits highlighted by critics (Becker & Riel, 2000). Findings from Becke r and Riel’s study ( 2000) suggest that teachers’ use of computer s with students aids in the gaining of both computer usage competence and includes hi gher order thinking tasks through communicating, thinking, producing, and pr esenting their ideas (Becker & Riel, 2000). Furthermore, emphasis across the lit erature is placed on technology skills proficiency and technology as a learning t ool to ensure technological diffusions in teacher education and training (Cantu, 2000; DeWitt & Horn, 2005; Keiper, Harwood, & Larson, 2000; Mason et al., 2000). These approaches are consistent with the diffusion of innovations and te chnology transfer strategies, such as addressing values-based concerns, instillin g trust in technology, and easing the transition to using the technology (Rogers, 1995). To achieve the diffusion objectives, by offering both computer literacy skills while enhancing instruction using technology, those in the field of social studies reported that transforming the curri cula and instructional processes must be promoted. To ensure this diffusion into classes by future teachers, there

PAGE 30

22 should be sufficient access to technology an d infusion of technology into social studies methods courses while affording opportunities to consider the daily demands of a teacher (Berson, 2000; Mas on et al., 2000; NCATE, 1997; Rose & Winterfield, 1999). Mason et al. ( 2000) highlighted guidelines for using technology in meaningful ways to prepare so cial studies teachers. The guidelines were based on current trends in the fi eld and are an effective diffusion of innovation strategies (M ason, et al., 2000; Rogers, 1995). These guidelines included extending learning opportunities by accessing digital archives for historical inquiry, modeling how to use te chnology in context to make teaching better, affording opportuniti es for future educators to study the relationship and the impact of technology on science and soci ety, and assisting teachers in using technology to foster skills for citiz enship. Offering skills development and modeling of activities in the content ar eas they will be teaching helps future educators to build confidence and computer skills and to envision how they can use technology in teaching and learning. Summary The field of social studies offers pub lished reviews of innovative uses; yet, there is a repeated call for more model uses by teachers. Guidelines have been developed based on modeling computer skills and using computers as a learning tool, and authors urge the use of technology to ensure diffusion of innovations. However, the use of models by educational faculty is split between offering skills training as opposed to technology integr ation (Berson, Mason, Heinecke, & Coutts, 2001). Bolick, Berson, Coutts, and Heinecke (2003) revealed that a

PAGE 31

23 slightly higher number of teacher education faculty continue to focus on technology skills rather than technology-i ntegration instruction. They also reported far more use of digital communication ra ther than instructional technologies (Barron, Kemker, Harmes, & Kalaydjian, 2003; Bolick, Berson, Coutts, & Heinecke, 2003). The emergence of technology usage exists across the literature and captures innovations in social studies classrooms to enhance students’ 21st Century Skills. However, an examination of technological and 21st Century Skills specific to World History classes has yet to be systematically explored. This study proposed to exam ine the types of computer use and integration styles in World History cla sses according to the 21st Century Skills and NCSS technology standards.

PAGE 32

24 Chapter 3 Method Participants The study was conducted in the School District of Hillsborough County (SDHC), a large suburban school district in Florida, the ninth largest school district in the United States. The diversity of the district matches that of the entire state of Florida, with students of the fo llowing ethnic breakdown: 43.97% White, 22.36% Black, 25.90% Hispanic, 2.70% Asian, 0.31% Native American, and 4.77% multi-racial (SDHC, 2006) students. The school district currently employs 3,336 senior-high-level teachers and empl oys between 6 to 20 secondary-level social sciences teachers at each of t he 25 high schools. Teachers’ experience ranges from 1 to 38 years (SDHC, 2006). All social science teachers in the district have access to technology and t he Internet at their schools (SDHC, 2006). For the purposes of this inquiry, a ll secondary social science teachers of World History in the district were asked to participate in a study on the use of technology in their classes, which yi elded a potential sample size of approximately 126 secondary World History teachers. Research Design The research design was deductive in nature and the conceptual framework is grounded in t he literature reviewed in the field (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The research employed a pragmat ic, intermethod (or mixed-method)

PAGE 33

25 approach, in which both quantitative and qualit ative questioning techniques were used to collect data (Creswell, 1998; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The study utilized a survey with both clos ed-ended (quantitative) and open-ended (exploratory, qualitative) items to fo rm complementary data (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). The mixed-method desi gn was an equivalent status design, thereby providing approx imately equal and parallel data types through the quantitizing of the qual itative portions of the surv ey data. This method was selected because it provides complement ary data to elaborate and clarify results from the quantitative portions of the selected survey instrument while serving to reduce biases and assumptions of the inquire r that may result from quantitative data analysis and to strengthen interpret ability (Green, Caracelli, & Graham, 1989; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998, 2003). Instrumentation The survey instrument, Percepti ons of Computers and Technology (Appendix E), was used with additional open-ended questions (Harmes, Kemker, Kalaydjian, & Barron, 2000; Hogarty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003). The instrument was designed to measure teachers’ perc eptions and reported use of technology in their classrooms and was field-te sted and then administered in a schooldistrict-wide assessment that utilized 2,156 participants (Barron, Harmes, Kalaydjian, & Kemker, 2003; Harmes, Kemker, Kalaydjian, & Barron, 2000; Hogarty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003). Explor atory factor analysis was conducted within each subscale of the instrument by descriptive data. The survey has reported scores of acceptable levels of re liability, with reported coefficient alphas

PAGE 34

26 ranging from .74 to .92 (Cronbach & Az uma, 1962; Hogarty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003). Furthermore, “relationships between instrument subscales and relationships with external variables provi de initial support for the validity of the scores” (reported below; Hogar ty et al., 2003, p. 158). The instrument assesses descriptive data from each participant and consists of subscales of assessm ent items: confidence and comfort ( = .91); general school support ( = .82); technical support ( = .86); types of software use by teachers ( = .77); types of softw are use by students ( = .72); integration of technology in the classroom ( = .89); personal use ( = .74); affinity toward computer use ( = .77); and aversion toward computer use ( = .79). The survey consists of forced-choi ce items and represents a 5-point Likertformat scale (e.g., 1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree and 5 = strongly agree ; Likert, 1967). An additional page was added to the questionnaire consisting of formal structured open-ended it ems that assess participants’ self-reported uses of technol ogy in their classroom (Appendix F). Participants self-reported by writing directly on the survey instrument in the space provided. It was estimated that it woul d take approximately 30 min to complete the entire survey. Procedure Appropriate approvals were obtained thro ugh the school district office of assessment and accountability and then the University of South Florida (USF) Institutional Review Board (IRB) that addressed the ethi cal nature of this study. No participants were harmed in this study. Special permissi on was sought from

PAGE 35

27 the IRB for an expedited review of the informed consent due to the survey nature of this study. Participants remained anonym ous unless they expressed interest in being part of the qualitative data collection process by providing more detailed information in the written-response secti on of the survey and by opting to give their contact information. At a monthly meeting for all highschool-level social studies department supervisors, the researcher distributed the surveys to supervisors of each of the 25 district high schools. The researcher read a script (Appendix B) to all social studies department supervisors. Each sch ool received a packet of surveys with their school name on it as an identifier. The directions for completion of the survey were scripted and posted on t he outside of the packet (Appendix C). Supervisors were instructed to follow st andard district procedures, by collecting all surveys and entering the number of World History teachers in their department and the number of complet ed surveys enclosed (Appendix C). Supervisors were given 2 weeks to return the completed surveys in the provided addressed, stamped envelopes. This time frame was consistent with survey procedures in this school district. The pa ckets included the school’s name so that the researcher could easily identify wh ich schools did not return their packet and contact department supervisors to ensure a ll completed surveys from their school were returned. Packets of surveys were delivered by the researcher to the schools without supervisor attendance at t he monthly meeting where the survey materials were initially distributed. To yi eld a better response rate, the researcher offered both individualand district-based incentives. A $50.00 gift certificate for

PAGE 36

28 Wal-Mart was given to each of two r andomly drawn participants who completed a drawing form upon returning their complet ed surveys (Appendix N). Additionally, one of the case study participants was r andomly selected to attend the Florida Educational Technology Conference (FETC) in 2007 (Appendix N). They received a district-provided substitute t eacher at no cost, and registration fees were paid to attend. Upon receiving the completed packets a preliminary review of the openended items was conducted. The researcher identified teachers who completed this section, thereby indicating that they are currently using technology in their classes, and who have provided their cont act information for further research investigation of their use of technology in lessons/activities by students. Ten teachers who completed the open-ended ques tions were randomly selected for follow-up. The researcher contacted t hese teachers via ema il and/or by phone and made arrangements to visit them to verify the open-ended responses, to ask follow-up questions for clarification pur poses, and to conduct member checking of the information gathered by the researc her. At this time, teachers were asked to submit copies of lessons or activiti es if they wished to be used as artifacts supporting their responses. Quantitative Analysis The research design was mixed me thod, with qualitative and quantitative components. The quantitative dat a collected in the survey instrument allowed for objectivity in data collection (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). Descriptive statistics, means scores, and confidence intervals were calculated for each descriptive item

PAGE 37

29 (SAS, 2005). Reliability coefficients we re computed for each subscale using Cronbach's alpha to assess the internal co nsistency of the subscales scores. Qualitative Analysis The qualitative analysis of this mi xed-method study served to add complementary data to elaborate on and clar ify the results from the quantitative portions. To ensure rigor, trustworthiness, and credibility of the qualitative portion of this study, the resear cher employed three strategies: unitizing/categorizing data, member checking and negative ca se analysis (Glaser, 1992; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Linc oln & Guba, 1985). The units of analysis were the indivi dual participant’s response statements to the open-ended questions and field notes from the member checking process. Each statement comprised a complete sentence, a phrase, or a word. Responses were analyzed using a constant-comparison method employing deductive logic (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Glaser, 1992; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The units were then categorized by identifying commonalties and relevant content among and within the response statements Categories developed a priori from survey instrument and literature in the field. The categories included types of software used, types of integration, enGauge 21st Century Sk ills for Digital Age Literacy, and the NCSS technology standards. However, the re searcher was aware that additional categories/themes may have emerged a posteriori as well (Glaser, 1992; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The raters used in this procedure were trained on cu rrent categories that exist within the

PAGE 38

30 survey and literature and on how to code; they also confirmed with one another their results. That is, three raters conducted this process and compared and reconciled differences that emerged. In terrater reliability percentages were calculated. Negative case or disconfirming evidence analysis involved a reexamination of responses after the initial analysis to see whether the characteristics or properties of th e emergent categories and themes were applicable across cases (teachers) in order to assist in the triangulation of the complementary qualitative data (Bowen, 2005; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The member checking process allowed the researcher to verify the accuracy of the qualitative results th rough participant validation to ensure trustworthiness of the data coding (Bow en, 2005; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). In this study, member checking involved visiting or calling participants and asking follow-up questions for clarification of the open-ended responses. The researcher reviewed with the teacher(s) the categorization of their qualitative data to confirm accuracy of the rating of the responses. This involved asking questions to gather a cl earer understanding of the teacher’s reported use of technology. At the sa me time, participants were asked to voluntarily provide copies of lesson plans or student pr oducts for clarification. Such artifacts, if provided, permitted the researcher to implement document analysis to ensure a clearer understanding of the reported use of technology. Quantitative and Qual itative Analysis

PAGE 39

31 The use of multiple data sources a llowed for triangulation of the data. In turn, triangulation allowed t he researcher to compare data sources for accuracy in findings and to ensure consistency in data findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The quantitat ive data collected from the survey instrument offered broad descriptive data on the participants, their reported frequency of use, types of software used, and integration of computers in the classroom. The qualitative data offered detailed acc ounts of usage examples. The interview conducted after the comp letion of member checking permitted participants to add remarks and statements to clarify their use of technology and to link their usage to NCSS standards and 21st Century Skills. The data from the survey, the coding of the qualitative responses, and the responses in the interview were compared to one another to confirm or disconfirm agreement, trends, and patterns in the data.

PAGE 40

32 Chapter 4 Results Introduction The emergence of technology usage ex ists across the social studies literature, but a proliferati on of publications that capt ure innovations in social studies classrooms has yet to unfold. The purpose of this research was to examine what types of technology are being used in secondary World History classes and how they are being integrat ed. This study served to add to the empirical data and to guide social studies teachers in the use of technology not only as a learning tool for 21st Century Skills but to assist and encourage other educators in their own endeavors to incor porate technology into the curriculum and disseminate uses of technology. The study employed a mixed-method approach, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative questioning techniques (Cre swell, 1998; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). Data were collected through the su rvey, Perceptions of Computers and Technology (Appendix E), designed to meas ure both teachers’ perceptions and use of technology in their classrooms (Hogarty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003). The instrument assessed descriptive data fr om each participant and 5-point Likertformat data from subscales: confidence and comfort general school; technical support; types of software use by teacher s; types of software use by students;

PAGE 41

33 integration of technology in the classroom; personal use; affinity toward computer use; and aversion toward computer us e. The quantitative data analysis yielded mean scores and confidence intervals fo r items on each subscale, reliability coefficients for each subscale, and Cr onbach alphas to assess the internal consistency of the subscales scor es. The qualitative open-ended questions served as complementary data to the surv ey data. Furthermore, categorization of the qualitative data and an informal interv iew process served as complementary data. Member checking of the categoriz ation of the data wa s conducted with the participant to ensure credibi lity and trustworthiness of the interpretation of responses. Using multiple sources allow ed the researcher to triangulate data. Quantitative Results Participants One hundred and twenty six Worl d History teachers from all 25 high schools in the School District of Hillsborough County (SDHC) were asked to participate in the study at a fall mont hly district social studies department head meeting. The researcher distributed packets of surveys and read instructions for completion of surveys and the procedures for returning the stamped, addressed envelopes directly to the researcher by the end of the fall semester. Twenty-one of the high schools opted to participate by returning completed surveys to the investigator. Email reminders were sent to department heads of the remaining 6 schools, and voicemail messages were left to indicate that late survey packets were welcome. Two of the 6 remaining high schools mailed completed surveys at the end of the school year. A total of 79 teachers ( n = 79) returned completed

PAGE 42

34 surveys to the investigator from 23 of t he 25 high schools in the district. Thus, the rate of survey return was 62%. Table 1 shows the descriptive data of this sample population. Of the 79 teachers who participated, 48 were male (60.76%) and 31 (39.24%) were female. The racial demographics were as follo ws: 6.49% African American; 82.42% White/Non-Hispanic; 1.30% Asian/Paci fic Islander; 5.19% Hispanic; and 2.60% Other, not specified. Two par ticipants (2.60%) did not co mplete this item of the survey. Forty teachers (50.63%) hav e earned a bachelor’s degree and 39 (49.37%) have earned a master’s of ar ts degree. The average numbers of years of teaching experience was 11 and ranged from 1 to 38 years. Fifty-one teachers reported that they currently taught onl y one of the three sophomore levels of World History; Regular World History, H onors/Gifted World History, or Advanced Placement World History; 25 teachers report ed that they currently taught two of the three levels; 3 teachers reported that th ey currently taught all three levels of World History courses. Total course levels taught across the 79 teachers who participated were as follows: 55 (69.92% ) World History Regular, 38 (48.10%) World History Honors/Gifted; and 18 (22.78%) Advanced Placement World History.

PAGE 43

35 Table 1 Participants’ Descriptive Data Frequency Percent Gender Male 48 60.76 Female 31 39.24 Race Native American 0 0 African American 5 6.49 White/Non-Hispanic 65 82.42 Asian/Pacific Islander 1 1.30 Hispanic 4 5.19 Other 2 2.60 Un-answered 2 2.60 Degree Bachelors 40 50.63 Specialist 0 0 Masters 39 49.37 Doctorate 0 0 Other 0 0 Course(s) Taught Regular World History 55 69.62 Honors/Gifted World History 38 48.10 Advanced Placement World Histor y 18 22.78 Teachers reported an average number of 28 students per class with a range of 12–35 (Table 2). The average number of computers per classroom used for instruction was 1.24 with a range of 1–5, with the exception of one case where a teacher reported to have 17 lapt ops in a portable cart housed primarily in that particular teacher’s class. Teachers reported an av erage number of 4

PAGE 44

36 years of using computers in the classroom for instruction, wit h a range of 0–20. Eighteen of the 79 teachers reported access to a computer lab at their school, while the district and individual school websites reported having at least one computer lab available at each school site typically housed in the library or media center (SDHC, 2006). Of these teachers, th ey reported an aver age of .23 hour(s) of use of the computer lab by students in their class each week. Table 2 Classroom Descriptive Data N Min Max Mean SD Skew Kurtosis Teaching years 79 1 38 10.81 9.900 1.13 0.21 Students per class 79 12 36 28.00 4.934 -.063 0.34 Number of computers in cl ass 79 1 17 1.24 2.052 6.12 45.47 Years using computers in class instruction 79 0 20 4.13 4.357 1.48 2.11 Access to computer lab 79 1 5 3.18 .384 1.72 1.00 Hours per week in lab 79 0 1 .23 .619 3.11 10.00 Question 1 What types of use of software, hardware, and/or Internet tools are being used by World History teachers? Teachers circled their level of use with a 5-item Likert scale of 1 = not at all 2 = once a month or less 3 = once a week 4 = several times a week and 5 = every day The survey results (Table 3) from the subscale “types of software us e by teachers” indica ted that the most frequently used technology was word processors ( M = 4.32, sk = -1. 86, kr = 2.58) and Internet browsing tools ( M = 4.32, sk = -1.74, kr = 1.55) and were used several times a week. The skew value indi cated an asymmetrical distribution of

PAGE 45

37 data. Negative skew values coupled with t he mean indicated that a majority of participants’ responses were all at t he high end of the usage scale with a few outliers forming a tail in the lower frequen cy of use range. The kurtosis value indicated the degree that the distribut ion curve peaked. Items with a positive kurtosis indicated a leptokurtic peaked distribution, further signifying more responses hanging near the mean. Items with a negative kurtosis indicate a platykurtic less peaked or flat distribut ion. The next item used on an average of once a week was presentation software ( M = 3.18, sk = -0. 06, kr = -1.50). Teachers reported using the following item s once a month or less: spreadsheets ( M = 2.40, sk = 0.67, kr = -0.86), databases ( M = 2.12, sk = 0.91, kr = -0.42), publishing programs ( M = 2.31, sk = 0.71, kr = -0.86), and graphics programs ( M = 2.00, sk = 1.32, kr = 0.24). Items with infrequent us e (below once a month or less to not at all) included the following: web publishing ( M = 1.51), drill and practice ( M = 1.63), games ( M = 1.79), simulations ( M = 1.67), tutorials ( M = 1.74), integrated learning systems ( M = 1.23), programming ( M = 1.51), and GIS ( M =1.54).

PAGE 46

38 Table 3 Types of Software Used to Complete School-Related Activities (by Teachers) 95% Confidence interval of the mean difference n Min Max Mean SD Skew Kurtosis Std error mean Lower Upper Word processors 74 1 5 4.32 1.159 -1. 86 2.58 .13 4.06 4.60 Spreadsheets 73 1 5 2.40 1. 371 0.67 -0.86 .16 2.08 2.72 Databases 69 1 5 2.12 1.312 0.91 -0.42 .16 1.80 2.43 Desktop publishing 71 1 5 2.31 1.300 0.71 -0.86 .16 1.99 2.63 Presentation software 73 1 5 3.18 1.503 -0.06 -1.50 .18 2.83 3.53 Web publishing 68 1 5 1.51 0.938 1.91 3.08 .11 1.29 1.74 Graphics programs 68 1 5 2.00 1.315 1.32 0.24 .16 1.69 2.32 Drill and practice 65 1 5 1. 63 1.126 1.53 0.89 .14 1.35 1.91 Games 68 1 5 1.79 1.127 1.19 0.16 .14 1.52 2.07 Simulations 70 1 5 1.67 0. 959 1.52 1.87 11 1.44 1.90 Tutorials 69 1 5 1.74 1. 038 1.44 1.55 12 1.49 1.99 Integrated learning Systems 65 1 4 1.23 0.606 2.88 8.33 .08 1.08 1.38 Web browsers 72 1 5 4.32 1. 298 -1.74 1.55 .15 4.01 4.62 Programming, authoring 68 1 5 1.51 0.954 1.97 3.24 .12 1.28 1.75 GIS 79 1 4 1.54 0.849 1. 69 2.29 .11 1.32 1.76 Note 1 = not at all ; 2 = once a month ; 3 = once a week ; 4 = several times a week ; 5 = every day ; GIS = geographic information systems. The survey results (Table 4) from t he subscale “types of software use by students” indicated that the use of technology by students included word processors ( M = 2.74, sk = 0.17, kr = -0 .88), Internet browsing ( M = 2.94, sk = 0.01, kr = -1.75), presentation tools ( M = 2.13, sk = 1.06, kr = 0.33), and games

PAGE 47

39 ( M = 2.30, sk = 0.75, kr = -0 .88) and were used between once a month to once a week. Teachers reported their students usin g other forms not at all or, in a few cases, once a month or less. These item s each held means of 1.80 and lower. Table 4 Types of Software Used to Complete School-Related Activities (by Students) 95% Confidence interval of the mean difference n Min Max Mean SD Skew Kurtosis Std error mean Lower Upper Word processors 73 1 5 2.74 1.269 0.17 -0.88 .15 2.44 3.04 Spreadsheets 66 1 5 1.51 0. 916 2.24 5.42 11 1.29 1.74 Databases 64 1 5 1.34 0. 739 3.00 10.82 09 1.16 1.53 Desktop publishing 65 1 4 1.72 0.927 1.07 0.13 .11 1.49 1.95 Presentation software 69 1 5 2.13 1.199 1.06 0.33 .14 1.84 2.41 Web publishing 64 1 4 1.52 0.835 1.63 1.95 .10 1.31 1.72 Graphics programs 64 1 4 1.78 0.999 1.05 -0.07 .12 1.53 2.03 Drill and practice 61 1 4 1.52 0.906 1.66 1.71 .12 1.29 1.76 Games 69 1 5 2.30 1.478 0. 75 -0.88 .18 1.95 2.66 Simulations 65 1 5 1.80 1. 063 1.30 1.08 13 1.54 2.06 Tutorials 67 1 4 1.60 0. 817 1.22 0.69 10 1.40 1.80 Integrated learning systems 61 1 4 1.28 0.661 2.84 8.50 .08 1.11 1.45 Web browsers 70 1 5 2.94 1. 701 0.01 -1.75 .20 2.54 3.35 Programming, authoring 63 1 4 1.29 0.580 2.45 7.31 .58 1.14 1.43 GIS 79 1 5 1.25 0.85 3. 06 9.82 .08 1.09 1.41 Note 1 = not at all ; 2 = once a month ; 3 = once a week ; 4 = several times a week ; 5 = every day ; GIS = geographic information systems.

PAGE 48

40 Question 2. With what types of teac hing methods are computers integrated in the classroom by World His tory teachers? Teachers circled their level of use with a 5-item Likert scale of 1 = not at all 2 = once a month or less 3 = once a week 4 = several times a week and 5 = every day The survey results (Table 5) from the subscale “integra tion of computers into the classroom” indicated that the most frequently used integration wa s as a communication tool ( M = 3.44, sk = -0.36, kr = -1 .56). The next level of use was that of once a month and included use as a research tool ( M = 2.66, sk = 0.26, kr = -0.91), for charts and reports ( M = 2.51, sk = .40, kr = -0.95), for classroom presentations ( M = 2.74, sk = 0.27, kr = -1.45), in co operative learning ( M = 2.02, sk = 1.14, kr = 0.16), independent learning ( M = 2.18, sk = 0.80, kr = 0.13), and as a decisionmaking tool ( M = 2.00, sk = 0.64, kr = -0.99). The following yielded average level of use as not at all to once a month: small groups ( M = 1.79), individual instruction ( M = 1.91), and as a reward ( M = 1.43).

PAGE 49

41 Table 5 Integration of Comput ers Into the Classroom 95% Confidence interval of the mean difference n Min Max Mean SD Skew Kurtosis Std error mean Lower Upper Small group instruction 73 1 5 1.79 1.04 1.26 1.03 .12 1.55 2.04 Individual instruction 74 1 5 1.91 1.11 1.22 0.83 .13 1.55 2.18 Cooperative groups 73 1 5 2.02 1.14 1.14 0.16 .13 1.76 2.29 As a reward 70 1 5 1.43 0.88 2.34 5.26 .10 1.22 1.64 Independent learning 76 1 5 2.18 1.08 0.80 0.13 .12 1.94 2.43 To tutor 69 1 4 1.54 0. 83 1.38 0.85 10 1.33 1.74 To promote student centered learning 72 1 5 2.13 1.07 0.52 -0.72 .13 1.87 2.38 As a research tool for students 76 1 5 2.66 1.20 0.26 -0.91 .14 2.38 2.93 As a problem solving, decisionmaking tool 68 1 4 2.00 1.09 0.64 -0.99 .13 1.74 2.64 As a productivity tool (charts, reports, other) 71 1 5 2.51 1.26 0.40 -0.95 .15 2.02 2.80 As a classroom presentation tool 73 1 5 2.74 1.55 0.27 -1.45 .18 2.38 3.10 As a communication tool 73 1 5 3.34 1.66 -0.36 -1.56 .19 2.96 3.73 Note 1 = not at all ; 2 = once a month ; 3 = once a week ; 4 = several times a week ; 5 = every day.

PAGE 50

42 Table 6 Types of Software Used to Complete Sc hool-Related Activities (by Teachers): Correlation Matrix Word p rocessing Spreadsheets Databases Desktop publishing Presentation software Web publishing Graphics programs Drill and p ractice Games Simulations Tutorials Integrated learning Web browsers Programming, a uthoring GIS Word processors ---Spreadsheets .94 ---Databases .77 .82 ---Desktop publishing P .85 .80 .73 ---Presentation software .94 .86 .72 .90 ---Web publishing .74 .79 .71 .79 .79 ---Graphics programs .76 .76 .79 .87 .79 84 ---Drill and practice .67 .72 .78 .70 .71 82 .75 ---Games .74 .80 .80 .79 .79 .83 .84 .82 ---Simulations .80 .86 .78 .76 85 .92 .83 .82 .92 ---Tutorials .77 .82 .74 .73 .81 .87 .79 .78 .88 .96 ---Integrated learning systems .67 .71 .78 .78 70 .82 .82 .79 .82 .82 .86 ---Web browsers .89 .95 .78 .85 94 .84 .83 .75 .83 .91 .87 .75 ---Programming, authoring .74 .79 .71 .79 .79 .92 .84 .74 .92 92 .88 .82 .84 ---GIS .67 .71 .78 .79 71 .82 .82 .79 .89 82 .86 .93 .75 .89 ---Note GIS = geographic information systems. Cronbach coefficient alpha for Table 6, = .97, p < .0001. Further analysis indicated that there is strong internal consistency of the items in the established subscales of the survey, yielding strong Cronbach coefficient alphas and individual Pears on correlation coefficients between items each of .67 and higher ( p < .0001). Correlation values of .70 or higher indicate a strong correlation, and t hose of .40–.70 indicate a moderate correlation. For

PAGE 51

43 example, correlations of .94 for web brow sers and presentation software indicate that teacher responses in these two item s correlate highly to one another (Table 6). Therefore, teachers’ frequency ra tings for these two items would be consistent within this sa mple and the population. Table 7 Types of Software Used to Complete School-Relat ed Activities (by Students): Correlation Matrix Word p rocessing Spreadsheets Databases Desktop publishing Presentation software Web publishing Graphics programs Drill and p ractice Games Simulations Tutorials Integrated learning Web browsers Programming, a uthoring GIS Word processors ---Spreadsheets .55 ---Databases .51 .92 ---Desktop publishing .53 .79 .88 ---Presentation software .64 .77 .70 .83 ---Web publishing .51 .84 .92 .96 .80 ---Graphics programs .62 .75 .76 .88 .80 84 ---Drill and practice .46 .67 .67 .71 .63 75 .67 ---Games .64 .67 .62 .65 .69 .62 .71 .72 ---Simulations .53 .79 .80 .76 74 .80 .64 .79 .74 ---Tutorials .46 .68 .62 .66 .71 .62 .62 .71 .71 .83 ---Integrated learning systems .35 .67 .75 .79 63 .82 .67 .72 .55 .79 .71 ---Web browsers .54 .81 .75 .79 83 .76 .75 .59 .72 .79 .86 .69 ---Programming, authoring .38 .72 .81 .85 .68 .88 .73 .78 .60 85 .77 .93 .74 ---GIS .40 .67 .68 .72 71 .76 .61 .75 .61 88 .79 .90 .76 .89 ---Note Cronbach coefficient alpha for Table 7, = .98, p < .0001. GIS = geographic information systems.

PAGE 52

44 Table 8 Integration of Computers Into the Classroom: Correlation Matrix Small group instruction Individual instruction Cooperative groups Reward Independent learning To tutor Student-centered learning Research tool for students Problem-solving, decision-making tool Productivity tool (charts, reports, other) Classroom presentation tool Communication tool Small group instruction ---Individual instruction 92 ---Cooperative groups .99 .92 ---Reward .69 .75 .69 ---Independent learning .73 .80 .73 .61 ---Tutor .52 .43 .52 .61 .41 ---Student-centered learning .63 .53 .63 .50 49 .83 ---Research tool for students .73 .80 .73 .60 .72 .57 .68 ---Problem-solving, decision-making tool .49 .40 49 .47 .38 74 .79 .55 ---Productivity tool (charts, reports, other ) .59 .50 .59 .47 .46 90 .81 .63 .74 ---Classroom presentation tool .68 .57 .68 .55 .52 65 .64 .74 .49 .73 ---Communication tool .52 .40 .52 55 .53 .52 .48 52 .49 .59 .68 ---Note Cronbach coefficient alpha for Table 8, = .95, p < .0001. Qualitative Results The unit of analysis was the indivi dual participant’s response statements to the open-ended questions and field notes from the member checking process and interview. Each statement comprised a complete sentence, a phrase, or a word. Responses were analyzed and categorized (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Li ncoln & Guba, 1985; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The

PAGE 53

45 categorized units were identified by commonalties and relevant content among and within the response statements Categories were developed a priori from the survey instruments and literat ure in the field. The categories included types of software used, types of integration, enGauge 21st Century Skills for Digital Age Literacy, and the NCSS technology st andards. No new categories/themes emerged a posteriori (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Linc oln & Guba, 1985; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The researcher and tw o raters were trained on current categories that exist within the survey and by reading the literature in the field and on how to use the coding sheet; they also confirmed with one another their results. Each rater read, reviewed, and categorized the responses using the response sheet (Appendix G). Thus, three rating sheets were generated for each participant who opted to complete the qua litative section. Once each rater analyzed each response, the researcher compiled the three forms for each participant. As a group, the raters examined, compar ed, and reconciled differences that emerged. Init ially, the process involved re reading the articles that defined the items in the rating sheet. The raters confirmed questions about the defined items and sample lesson descrip tors with one another. After becoming familiar with the literatur e and definitions of terms, the raters developed consistency in rating. Interrater reliabili ty was strong as the raters agreed at a level of 100%. The process of negative ca se analysis or examining any potential disconfirming evidence involved a re-examination of responses to see whether the characteristics or properties of t he categories and themes were applicable across cases (teachers) in order to assist in the triangulation of the

PAGE 54

46 complementary qualitative data (Bowen, 2005; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). For example, there was one case in which t he teacher reported t heir students’ use of Windows Movie Maker. This particular item was not listed on the rating sheets, but the raters decided together that this item would fall into the category of presentation software as the tool was used for presentati ons offered to the class. Question 3. How are lessons and activities conducted with computers by World History teachers? The follow-up questions obtained more information on how teachers were implementing the comput ers that they reported use of in the survey data. Of the 79 participants, 59 participants (75%) completed the openended questions. In this section they describ ed a lesson, activity, or project that incorporated the use of computers by st udents in their World History class(es). Overall, teachers only reported on lessons that incorporated three types of computer use: presentation software (including Windows Movie Maker), web browsers, and word processing. Two additi onal categories of use emerged: use of web browsers with presentation software and web browsers with word processors. The reported integration types included working in small groups, cooperative groups, student-centered lear ning, independent learning, problemsolving or decision-making, and then to present information to the class.

PAGE 55

47 Table 9 Reported Lessons, Activities, and Projec ts and Integration of Computers n Small group instruction Individual instruction Cooperative groups Reward Independent learning To tutor Student-centered learning Research tool for students Problem-solving, decision-making tool Productivity tool (charts, reports, other) Classroom presentation tool Communication tool Word processor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spreadsheets 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Databases 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Desktop/publishing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presentation software 23 12 1 12 0 3 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 Web publishing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Graphics 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Drill & practice 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Games 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Simulations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tutorials 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Integrated learning systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Web browsers 16 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 16 16 0 3 0 Programming, authoring 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GIS 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 Web browsers & presentation software 15 12 3 12 0 7 0 15 15 15 0 15 0 Web browsers & word processing 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 Note GIS = geographic information systems.

PAGE 56

48 The member checking process allo wed the researcher to verify the accuracy of the qualitative results th rough participant validation (Bowen, 2005; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The researcher emailed teachers and requested either a meeting at their school or a telephone call to confirm the rate rs coding of their written responses and to ask follow-up que stions for clarification of their openended responses. Of the 59 teachers who completed the qualit ative questions, only 25 marked “yes” that the researc her may contact them for follow-up regarding their written responses to bet ter understand the use of technology in their classes. There were three phases of contacting teachers. The first phase involved contacting 10 teachers who were randomly selected for follow up. The second phase involved contacting 10 additional teachers and those who had not replied, and the third phas e involved contacting the re maining 5 teachers and all those who had not replied previously. Ultim ately 8 of the 25 teachers participated in the follow up. The researcher cont acted these teachers via email and by phone and made arrangements to either visit them at their school or speak by phone to verify the open-ended responses, to ask follow-up questions for clarification purposes, and to conduct memb er checking of the information rated by the researcher. At that time, teachers were asked to submit copies of lessons or activities to be used as artifacts suppor ting their responses. Initially, 3 of the first phase of 10 selected teachers res ponded. Two completed this process during a face to face meeting at t heir school and one asked to meet at the university campus as it was more conveni ent for them to meet prior to a class they were taking. The remaining 7 of the first phase were contacted again and

PAGE 57

49 only 1 teacher replied and completed the fo llow-up by phone. Therefore, 4 of the initial 10 teachers participated in the fo llow up. Ten additional teachers were selected in the second phase and were contacted to complete the follow-up interview. One teacher responded and parti cipated in the follow-up by phone. The remaining 9 of the second phase were contacted again and none replied to complete the follow-up. In the third phase, the remaining 5 teachers and all previous teachers who did not respond were contacted via email and by voicemail and asked to participate in the fo llow up. Initially, none of the teachers responded. However, at the end of the sch ool year one teacher contacted the researcher to complete the follow up on the phone. A tota l of 8 teachers completed the follow-up member che cking process. The member checking interviews confirmed the correct codi ng of all teacher-written responses and allowed for additional input and descripti ons of their lesson, which added another layer of depth to how their particular le sson exhibited the 21st Century Skills and the NCSS Technology Standards (Table 10, see also Appendix G). The ratings revealed that all sample activities included each of the 21st Century Skills with the exception of scientific and economic literacy. These two items would rely on content specific to scientific concepts and economic practice and policies. While there is sufficient content in World History to practice such skills, not every lesson would necessarily include the practice of these specific skills. However, all other 21st Century Skills and all NCSS tec hnology standards were addressed in the lessons teachers shared in this portion of the research.

PAGE 58

50 Table 10 enGauge 21st Century Skills and NCSS Technology Standards enGauge 21st Century Skills NCSS Technology Standards/Position Digital-Aged Literacy € Basic Literacy € Scientific Literacy € Economic Literacy € Technological Literacy € Visual Literacy € Information Literacy € Multicultural Literacy € Global Awareness € Inventive Thinking € Adapt/Managing € Self-Direction € Curiosity € Creativity/Risk Taking € Higher Order Thinking Effective Communication € Teaming/Collaboration € Interpersonal Skills € Personal Responsibility € Social/Civic Responsibility € Interactive Communication High Productivity € Prioritizing, Planning, Managing € Use of Real World Tools € Relevant/Quality Extend learning beyond what could be done without technology. Technology introduced in context. Opportunity for students to study relationships among science, technology, and society. Fosters the development of the skills, knowledge, and participation as good citizens in a democratic society. Contributes to the research and evaluation of social studies and technology. Note NCSS = National Council for the Social Studies. Teacher A was a first-year teac her holding a bachelor’s degree. She reported that her regular and Hono rs/Gifted students used web browsers independently to research a topic and then collaborate in the cl assroom with their groups on what would be presented and how. The teacher required the students to use a word processor to develop pamphlets on their topics. She assigned sample topics such as Muslim culture, Christian culture during the Crusades, technological developments across time periods and cultures, literature across time periods and cultures, women’s roles across time and geographical regions, and art/architecture over time and regions This teacher reported that using the Internet offered information above and beyond that which only one textbook

PAGE 59

51 could offer but “challenges students to ma ke decisions and judgments about the sources, points of view, and what information they will include.” She continued to state that “Internet resear ch challenges students to th ink for themselves at a higher cognitive level and to be creative in how they will present information.” She added that “such skills are essential to being an informed citizen in a global world and democratic society.” This teacher offered sample lesson instructions on researching “Muslim Cu lture” (Appendix I). Teacher B has taught for 22 years and holds a bachelor’s degree. He reported that his students used web browse rs to conduct individual research and then collaborate with their team in and outside of class to create Microsoft PowerPoint presentations. This teacher required students to present their topics in a persuasive fashion and debate ot her teams to compare government philosophies, economic policies, foreign pol icies, and societies. His classes also conducted Internet research and wrote bi ographies on historical figures. This teacher reported that such projects “challenge students to be more globally aware and to make global connections with ot her societies.” He also stated that technology allowed his students to access “primary sources, documents, letters, and journals” that were not pr ovided in their textbooks. Teacher C has taught for 3 years and holds a bachelor’s degree. She reported that her Advanced Placem ent and Honors/Gifted students conducted Internet research in groups and prepared Po werPoint presentations for the class. Her students are given broad questions t hat become a unit or theme whereby groups researched and presented different aspects of the questions that lead to

PAGE 60

52 whole class answers from different pers pectives. An example offered was “What criteria leads to a revolution?” Student s then researched different cultures, time periods, and revolutions to be presented to the class. The class as a whole then evaluated all the presentations and ca me to conclusions as to what characteristics or circumstances can lead to revolutions. The teachers added that such research requires the students to ex amine how cultures differ but how they are similar and their events project into the future and today’s events. The research her students conducted allowed t hem to explore topics and information not covered in the class text. It also challenged them to “discriminate and find information, evaluate websites and present support for their findings.” Teacher D had been teaching for 7 years and held a master’s degree. He had five computers in the classroom. He reported on his Advanced Placement (AP) students’ use of Internet resear ch, collaborating with their groups to investigate a question such as compare and contrast. His students were tasked with investigating a topic and presenti ng it in AP answer format but in a PowerPoint form. Students were required to locate documents and images and include a thesis statement to support their findings. He contends that the information they locate goes beyond the text, especially in areas of Asian studies. His students discovered a variety of websites that highlighted Asian art. He reported that those webs ites were an important t ool for teaching history and learning about the culture and societies of Japan. Furthermore, students learned how storytelling was done through the us e of elaborate artwork. He shared a favorite website: MIT Vi sualizing Cultures at

PAGE 61

53 http://ocw.mit.edu/ans7870/21f/21f.027j/m enu/. The website offered fine art collections with history content and curriculum that would not have been accessible to his students without the Inter net. His students were also required to conduct research throughout the school y ear on a wide range of topics including the following: comparing cultures, inv entions, technology, industrialism, wars, globalization and global cont ributions, and their impact on today’s world events. This teacher offered sample lesson inst ructions on researching “Asian Cultures from 800 BCE to 1450” (Appendix J). Teacher E has taught for 5 years and holds a bachelor’s degree. She reported on her regular World History students’ use of Internet research, collaborating with their groups to re search a topic and prepare class presentations using PowerPoint present ations. She report ed that her students must conduct research on specific cult ures and include information of their government structure, econom ies, trade, and major relig ions. She reported that students cannot create such “well inform ed presentations without information outside of the text.” She believes str ongly that these projects help “bridge cultural connections as students can expl ore things our culture has or does not have in common with peoples ar ound the world.” She also adds that such “critical thinking rigor and the use of technology pr epares students for the working world, college, and life as an informed citizen.” Teacher F has taught for 5 years and holds a master’s degree. She reported on her regular World History students’ use of Internet research, collaborating with their groups to re search a topic and prepare class

PAGE 62

54 presentations using word processing tool s and publishing tools. One example of a project was to study the major re ligions of the world and to prepare presentations and major characteristi cs of renaissance art, architecture, literature, philosophy, and politics/government (Appendix K). The “task can only be completed with complementary informa tion found outside of the textbook.” The teacher reported that students developed thesis statements to introduce their topics and then support ed the statement with info rmation found in their search. Teacher G has taught for 5 years and holds a bachelor’s degree. He reported on his Advanced Placement Wo rld History students’ conducting independent Internet resear ch and tools and using word processors to prepare reports, presentations, and maps. He r eported that his students are tasked with visiting Worldmapper.org (SASI Group & Newman, 2007). His students are required to visit the website and ex amine various data and maps across countries and time periods. In some cases, data are available fr om the year 1500 to 2007. Students can opt to select preexisting maps or can create a map of categories of interest to them. Students must print their maps or import them to a word processing tool and include a wr itten report and analysis of the results linking the topic to an item they have st udied in class. Additionally, students must report what they think people should know or can learn from this data. Students ultimately presented their findings to the cl ass. This teacher contends that “this activity makes students more aware of differences around the world and of

PAGE 63

55 issues that are globally important.” He f eels technology is crucial in the social studies classroom and offers more than one textbook can provide. Teacher H has taught for 12 years and holds a bachelor’s degree. She reported on her regular World History students’ use of Internet research, collaborating with their groups to res earch a topic and prepare PowerPoint presentations to be presented to the cl ass. Students are taske d with researching differences across (a) genders, cultures and time periods, (b) government structures across time, and (c ) technology across cultures and time periods. This teacher added that she is amazed with t he information her students have located and the wealth of websites they have in troduced to her, which she can in turn use in future classes. She stated t hat using technology required students to make decisions similar to that of a histor ian. They learn that “they can choose to use information or disregard information and that decision” can impact the presentation. This “knowledge is crucial to living in toda y’s’ world with so much information available on TV and on the In ternet.” She contends that students must have the life skills to locate, collec t, and make decisions about information. Textbook technology support. During the member checking process and interview, teachers were asked what textbooks and teacher kits they use and what technology support is offered and/or used in their classes. The district has adopted McDougall Littel’s “World History: Pa tterns of Interacti on” (Beck, 2005) for use in Regular and Honors/Gifts Worl d History classes and McGraw Hill’s “Traditions and Encounters: A Global Pe rspective on the Past” (Bentley, 2006) for Advanced Placement World History cla sses. All 9 teachers reported that the

PAGE 64

56 textbooks provide CD-ROM visual aids, websites, and links within the textbook chapter and units, and the textbooks offer an online support site that includes online e-books including c hapters, chapter summaries, flashcards, notes, review games, puzzles, study guides, and online quizzes. Teachers consistently reported that the te xtbooks offer CD-ROM support incl uding visual aids of maps, graphs, charts, and images. They added that a feature they appr eciated was that the maps offer descriptor overlays at a cli ck of a button that t hey could not easily recreate with an overhead transparency and ma rker. Two of the 9 teachers found this to be a great resource, as they have a multimedia projector in their classroom. Seven of the 9 teachers found it inconvenient that they do not have their own multimedia projec tor but a departmental projec tor that must be checked out for use. They reported that they c annot rely solely or become dependent on the CD-ROM visual aids. Teachers also reported that t he textbooks include website links related to the chapter or unit. Three teachers reported using these sites or asking students to visit these si tes but have found them to be unreliable as some sites no longer exist or have mo ved since the textbook went into print. Additionally, they reported t hat it is easier for their st udents to conduct an Internet search of the item they are researchi ng in order to locate information. The remaining 7 teachers do not use the websit es or links provided in the textbook. Three teachers reported requiring students to access the textbook website and to take online quizzes and bring in print outs of their scores as homework.

PAGE 65

57 Additional Results The survey instrument collected addition al data that was not specific to the research questions but that might shed so me light on inferences drawn from the data analysis. Teachers on the average reported that they “agree” that they have confidence and comfort using computers e ffectively in their classrooms and in computer assignments and that they “agr ee” that computers enhance teaching. They reported on the average that t hey are “neutral” about general school support. Teachers responded on an average that they use computers for personal use “several times per week” as a communication tool, a productivity tool, and as a research tool, and “once a week” for multimedia use and for fun or entertainment. Participants’ affinity towa rd computer use in the classroom was consistently reported as “ agree” and the report ed aversion was low as a reported “disagree” to items on this scale. Summary of Quantitative and Qualitative Results The use of multiple data sources allo wed the researcher to triangulate the data for accuracy in reporting of findings and to ensure consistency in data findings and reporting. The quantitative data offered broad descriptive data on the participants, their frequen cy of software use and int egration of computers in the classroom. The qualitative data offe red more detailed accounts of uses consistent with the usage themes from the survey data. The member checking process ensured the credibility and tr ustworthiness of qualitative data interpretation and coding, while pe rmitting participants to add remarks and statements in an interview to enhanc e the understanding of their use of

PAGE 66

58 technology, which complements both the previously collected quantitative and qualitative data. The survey data gathered information from 79 teachers or 63% of the World History teachers in the district. The quantitative data revealed that the majority of the surveyed teachers who use technology in the class use word processors and Internet browsing tool s, and then presentation software. The primary forms of integration of technol ogy were for communication, classroom presentations, charts and reports, cooperative learni ng groups, independent learning, and as a decision making tool. Fifty-nine of the 79 participants (75%) opted to complete the written responses on the survey. Consistent with the survey results, the qualitative data yielde d teacher reported lessons, activities, or projects that incorporat ed the use primarily of w eb browsers, presentation software, and word processing.

PAGE 67

59 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Recommendations Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to ex amine what types of technology were used in secondary World History classes and how they were integrated. This study served to add to the data in the fiel d, examine use of technology as a 21st century learning tool, and encourage other educators in their own endeavors to incorporate technology into the curricu lum. The mixed-method approach utilized the survey instrument, Perceptions of Computers and Technology (Appendix E), designed to measure both t eachers’ perceptions and use of technology in their classrooms, combined with qualitative inqu iry of written responses and selected cases. The data gleaned from the written responses and the selected case studies served to provide complementar y data to elaborate and clarify results from the quantitative porti ons of the analysis (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). Research Questions The study explored the following research questions: 1. What types of software, hardware, and/or Internet t ools are being used by World History teachers? (Quantitative) 2. With what types of teaching met hods are computers integrated in the classroom by World History teachers? (Quantitative)

PAGE 68

60 3. How are lessons and activities conducted in the classroom by World History teachers? (Qualitative) Significance of the Study Social studies content and teaching strategies that require higher order or critical thinking yield promising grounds for innovative uses of technology to develop 21st Century Skills. However, there has been a need for research in the field that addresses effective practice and pedagogy of uses of technology in the classroom as linked to 21st Century Skills and the NCSS (2006) technology guidelines (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; McGlinn, 2007; NCSS, 2006; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). The data yielded technology usage patterns consistent within the literatur e. The study was significant in that it revealed a clea r linkage to NCSS technology standards and 21st Century Skills that enhance critical thinking, problem-solving, and decisionmaking skills in the social studies classroom. Procedures The study employed a mixed-method desi gn. All World History teachers in the school district were invited to complete the quantitative survey, which included open-ended questions that yielded qualitative data. The written responses were reviewed and coded by thr ee raters according to the types of software and integration styles in the survey and related literature. A small sample volunteered to participate in a follow-up interview that consisted of member checking the accuracy of the ra ters’ interpretation of the written response as well as asking follow-up ques tions and permitting teachers to add

PAGE 69

61 comments and/or submit copies of lessons, ac tivities, or projects as artifacts. The use of multiple data sources allowed the researcher to triangulate the data for accuracy in reporting of findings and to ens ure consistency in data findings and reporting. The member checking processes ensured credibility and trustworthiness of the ratings of the written responses. Discussion of Findings Seventy-nine World History teachers (62%) participated in the study by volunteering to complete the survey. Fi fty-nine teachers completed the written responses and 25 of those teachers check ed the option on the form that they agreed to be contacted for a follow-up. All teachers were contacted and invited to participate in the follow-up. Eight total teachers replied and participated in the follow-up interviews. Types of software (Question 1). Teachers reported a high frequency of use of word processors, Internet browsi ng tools, and presentation software. They reported moderate teacher use of spreadsheets, databases, publishing programs, and graphics programs. Items of infrequent teacher use or no use at all were web publishing, drill and practi ce, games, simulations, tutorials, integrated learning systems, programming, and GIS. Teachers reported that their students frequently used word processors, In ternet browsing tools, presentation software, and games. Items of infrequent student use to no use at all were spreadsheets, databases, desktop publishi ng, web publishing, graphics, drill and practice, simulations, tutorials, int egrated learning systems, and GIS. The data were consistent with literature in the fi eld indicating that the primary use of

PAGE 70

62 computers by students in the fi eld of social studies is that of word processing, Internet searches, present ation creation with spreadshe ets, databases, desktop publishing, web publishing, graphics, drill and practice, simula tions, tutorials, integrated learning systems, and GIS (B erson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, and Siko, 2005; Whitwort h & Berson, 2003). The correlations in this and all the subscales were quite hi gh and revealed that the teachers were likely to report rates of frequency consistent ly across items of similar ratings. For example, teachers who report ed high level of use of web browsers were likely to be the same teachers who r eported high levels of us e of presentation tools. Types of integration (Question 2). Teachers reported that they most frequently used the computer as a commu nication tool. They also reported frequent to moderate use as a research tool, for charts and reports, for classroom presentations, in cooperative l earning, in independent learning, as a productivity tool, and as a problem-solvi ng or decision-making tool. Items of infrequent use to no use at all included sma ll groups, individual instruction, and as a reward. These data are consistent with findings in a large-scale study conducted in this district across school s and subject areas (Barron, Kemker, Harmes, & Kalaydjian, 2003). The researcher s of that study f ound that the most frequent integration by social studies teac hers was that of a communication tool followed by research, as a productivity tool, and for problem-solving or decisionmaking. Lessons and activities (Question 3). Teachers were asked to share a lesson, project, or activities that incor porated the use of comp uters by students in

PAGE 71

63 their classes. Of those t hat opted to complete the written portion of the survey, teachers reported on lessons that incor porated three types of computer use: presentation software (including Movi e Maker), web browsers, and word processing. Two additional categories of use emerged: use of web browsers with presentation software and web browsers with word processors. Teachers integrated computers into these lessons, activities, or projects through small groups, cooperative groups, student-center ed learning, indepen dent learning, problem-solving, or decision-making and r equired presentation of the information to the class. The ratings of the writt en responses indicated representation of sample lessons, activities, and projects that exhibit development of all 21st Century Skills of digital literacy, invent ive thinking, effective communication, and high productivity and were clearly lin ked to the NCSS technology standards (Table 10). The areas of scientific and econo mic literacy were specific to content topics selected by st udents and teachers. Interpretation of mixed data. There was consistency across data sources (survey data, written response codings, and interview data). The qualitative data complemented the quantitat ive data with information not focused on by the survey. The information gathered from teac hers in the member checking process and follow-up interview indicated strong ar guments for computer s as a tool to enhance critical thinking and 21st Century Skills. Teachers described assigning teams to research topics whereby students conducted historical inquiry, made decisio ns about what information should be presented, and created classroom present ations to their peers. The topics

PAGE 72

64 ranged from investigating aspects of Mus lim culture and Christian culture during the Crusades, technological developments across time periods and cultures, literature across time periods and cu ltures, women’s roles across time and geographical regions, and art/architecture over time and regions; comparing government philosophies, economic policie s, foreign policies, and societies; investigating what criteria leads to a re volution across different cultures and time periods; examining how ancient Asian hi story was documented in artwork and making interpretations of historical event s using digitized Japanese art online at MIT Visualizing Cultures, challenging st udents to investigate a world issue and use Worldmapper.org (SASI Group & Newman, 2007) to graph the data supporting their research on the topic; and, lastly, to using a simulation website called Pyramid Challenge (BBC, 2007), wh ereby student decisions related to geography, math, economy, and l abor impact the final out come of the building structure and stability. Teachers consistently reported that it is crucial to enhance textbook content with research from the Internet, especially in areas of Asian and Middle Eastern culture and histories (Newmark 2000). Furthermore teachers reported that the action of historical inquiry affo rds students opportunities to use valuable research to problem solve and make dec isions, while collaborating with their team. Teachers reported that these skills are fundamental for living in today’s globally connected world and crucial to informed citizenship. Teachers also indicated that the very natur e of World History involves global comparisons. This required the development of thesis statements wh ile providing supporting

PAGE 73

65 evidence. Teachers expressed concern that when the textbook provides the data, summary, and thesis, t he critical thinking or decision-making is done for the students and this does not afford students the opportunity to develop valuable real world skills. The nature of the World History classroom challenges students to compare, over time and change, human developments and interactions between cultures, states, governments, and ec onomic systems, expansion, conflict, economic trade, and labor. Furthermore, the courses examine gender roles, religion, technology, arts, and invent ions (College Board, 2007; Florida Department of Education, 2007). The very nature of the content knowledge offers many opportunities for the intersecti on with pedagogy and the integration of technology (Bull et al., 2007; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Shulman, 1986). Shulman (1986) highlighted the interc hangeability of content covered, pedagogical practice, and technological tools of choice (TCP Model). Recently, Mishra and Koehler (2006) expanded this model to underscore the changing role of technology with content and pedagogy (Figure 1). The use of 21st century technology tools with specific cont ent and teaching methods has become a pedagogical strategy in its own right, re ferred to as Technol ogical Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK), whereby students conduct high order thinking projects that “extend l earning beyond what can be done without technology” (NCSS, 2007, p.1). Teachers interviewed in this study revealed specific use of technology to enhance students’ comprehension of cont ent knowledge (Table 11). The

PAGE 74

66 requirements of students in World History courses required the act of doing historical inquiry by conducting research to compare peoples and cultures across time. Students delved into content-specific projects for historical inquiry with various uses of technology. Technolog ical Pedagogical Cont ent Knowledge in World History classes afforded student s opportunities to enhance their 21st Century Skills while addressi ng the NCSS Technology Standards. Table 11 Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in World History Pedagogical knowledge Content knowledge Technological knowledge Historical inquiry in … € small groups € cooperative groups € student-centered learning € independent learning € problem-solving or decision-making € presentations € Investigating aspects of Muslim culture and Christian culture during the crusades € Research topics across time periods and cultures/geographic regions, such as o technological developments o Literature o women’s roles o art/architecture over time and regions o government philosophies, economic policies, foreign policies, and societies € Investigating what criteria leads to a revolution across different cultures, and time periods € Examining how ancient Asian history was documented in artwork and making interpretations of historical events using newly digitized Japanese art online at MIT Visualizing Cultures € Challenging students to investigate a world issue and use Worldmapper.org to graph the data supporting their research on the topic € Using a simulation website Pyramid Challenge whereby student decisions related to geography, math, economy, and labor impact the final outcome of the building structure and stability € Presentation tools € Web browsers € Word processing € Web browsers & presentation tools € Web browsers & word processing

PAGE 75

67 Limitations There were limitations to the study that should be noted. Every effort was made to reduce attrition and to increase inte rnal validity. Efforts were made to reach participants to complete the followup, including visiting them at their schools or conducting telephone interviews However, a potential bias of the sample population may exist as participat ion was voluntary. An interest or particular disposition toward computer use may have influenced volunteering for this portion of data collection. Ev ery effort was made to reduce r esearcher bias through the use of prepared scripts and writ ten instructions that were used when administering the survey materials (C ampbell & Stanley, 1963). The following threats to external validity must also be considered. Population validity relates to generalizing to the populat ion from which the sample was drawn, and the findings from this study may not general ize to the entire population of World History teachers in this district as there may have been a bias or predisposition to technology use or concerns that prom pted the sample population to participate (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). Recommendation for Future Research The results of this study are consis tent with previous findings in the publication field of social studies and social studies education (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Wh itworth & Berson, 2003). It indicated usage of technology in World History cla sses consistent with 21st Century Skills and the NCSS Technology Standards. Social Studies content and teaching strategies that require higher order or cr itical thinking yield promising grounds for

PAGE 76

68 technology use to develop 21st Century Skill s. The survey of teachers in this district did not reveal new innovative us es of computers, bey ond that of previous literature (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Kopkowski, 2006; NCSS, 2006; Technology Counts, 2006; U.S. Department of Education, 2004, 2005; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). It must be noted t hat particular social studies courses might indicate different styles of integration based on the very nature of the course (Bull et al., 2007; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Shulman, 1986). For example, geography teachers may be more inclined to use GIS systems, maps, and charting tools than World History teachers. Research in the areas of specific courses within the fi eld of social studies or a cross comparison of uses may uncover differences in technology use and integration. Furthermore, the incorporation of the TPCK framework and model uses of technology into social science methods courses for teacher pr eparation yields grounds for further diffusions of innovations, as well as examining the changing role of teacher willingness to incorporate te chnology into classrooms. Still, new uses of technology are beginn ing to emerge in the literature that were not in use in the sample populat ion of this study. Other technologies emerging in the field should be further ex amined in relation to World History content. The use of virtual artificial so cieties, whereby students make decisions that act as catalysts that impact society, help students make a connection between individual decisions and the im pact on the larger society (Berson & Berson, 2007). Such activities could be fu rther explored in World History classes to examine the impact of expansionism on cultures, trade, economics, spread of

PAGE 77

69 technology, and religious practices. The use of digital audio through creating free PodCasts is used in classrooms to cha llenge students to research, gather data, write scripts, and edit and record newsca sts on a particular topic (Lipscomb, Guenther, & McLeod, 2007; Vinc ent & van’t Hooft, 2007). For example, students could be assigned to create “In the news today circa 1450” Pod casts whereby groups could be assigned a culture or r egion around the world. The Learn out Loud Podcast directory at http://www.lear noutloud.com/Podcast-Directory offers World History related Podcasts that can be used by teachers for content sake, as well as offering models or examples for students to co nsider when building their own. Use of web-mapping and virtual gl obes using GIS and Google Earth afford opportunities to explore world issues and conduct global problem-solving from a technology and visual spatial skills aspec t (Eui-kyung, 2007a, 2007b). These new technologies should be explored for thei r ability to expand content knowledge, while transforming pedagogy and enhancing technological and 21st Century Skills (Bull et al., 2007; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Shulman, 1986). Recent trends have indicated an intere st in examining learning outcomes specifically attributed to technology us e in content areas (Schrum et al., 2007). Some authors contend that t here is a need to link skills acquired through the use of technology to higher order thinking skills of standardized and/or high stakes testing (Friedman, 2006; Schrum et al., 2007). Studies that examine learning outcomes by traditional, textbook-based me thods in comparison to computerbased historical inquiry might offer insight in to these areas of study. In the field of social studies, use of computers for re search purposes—for example, collecting

PAGE 78

70 and sorting data for presentations—enhanc es students’ skills of literacy, decision-making, historical thinking, inquiry, subject mastery, and active citizenship skills. Still, research by Sa ye and Brush (2007) indicates that while students can and do conduct searches for information areas, there is a need for further study into the pedagogy of scaffoldin g activities to assist students in the critical thinking skills of synthesizing t he information into complex forms of selfdiscovered thesis development, narratives, and arguments (Say e & Brush, 2002, 2007). Summary The mix-method study investigated the types of computer software use and styles of integration in World History classes in one of the largest school districts in the nation. In the first phas e of data collection, quantitative data was gathered using the survey instrument, Perc eptions of Computers and Technology (Appendix E). The statistical analysis yi elded descriptive demographic data and Likert-format data on subscales: conf idence and comfort; general school support; technical support; types of software use by teachers; types of software use by students; integration of technology in the classroom; personal use; affinity toward computer use; and aversion toward com puter use. Statisti cal analysis generated mean scores, reliability coefficients ( p < .0001) at .67 or higher and Cronbach alphas ( = .95–.97). The quantitative data revealed that teachers in this district primarily used computers for communicati on and for student In ternet research and presentations.

PAGE 79

71 The qualitative phase of the data collections wa s gathered through written responses on questions added to the survey and through interviews asking teachers to share a lesson, activity, or project requiring the us e of computers by their students. Written responses were evaluated and coded according to types of software use and style of integr ation, 21st Century Skills, and NCSS technology standards. Teacher s reported on lessons inco rporating the use of Internet research and present ation preparation using eit her word processors or Microsoft PowerPoint. The interview consis ted of a member checking process to confirm ratings and interview questions to better understand the skills acquired in the reported lessons. While there was no reporting of new innovative uses of computers that go beyond cu rrent literature in the field, teachers offered compelling responses as to how lessons incorporating Internet research and presentations enhance critical thinking skills that correlate to 21st Century Skills and NCSS standards for use of technology. Teachers reported that computers are not merely another means to the same ends as a textbook, but rather a tool to research knowledge, make decisi ons, problem solve, formulate thesis statements, and construct knowledge to be presented to classmates. Furthermore, World History teachers reported the importance of outside information provided through Internet res earch as it yields content across expansive time frames and across many cultures that textbooks do not cover adequately. The tasks conducted by student s afforded opportunities to enhance critical thinking and problem-solving skills using digital resources and technology tools. These skills are highly noted as essential skills unique to today’s

PAGE 80

72 technology-based and globally interactiv e world and are essential for preparing tomorrows citizens in not only World Histo ry classes but in all social studies classrooms.

PAGE 81

73 References Barron, A., Harmes, C., Kalaydjian, K., & Kemker, K. (2003). Large-scale research study on technology in K-12 School: Technology integration as it relates to the national technology standards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35 (4), 489-507. BBC (2007). Pyramid Challenge Retrieved October 10, 2007 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancien t/egyptians/launch_gms_pyramid_build er.shtml. Beal, C., & Mason, C. (2001) Preparing a virtual field trip to teach value of community and sense of place. Journal of Computers in Social Studies 9 (3), [Online]. Retrieved October 8, 2007 from http://www.cssjournal.com/ Beck, R. B. (2005). World History: Patterns of Interaction. McDougall Littell: Geneva, IL. Becker, H. J., & Riel, M. M. ( 2000). Teacher professional engagement and constructivist-compatible computer us e. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tl c/findings/report_7/ Bellan, J. M., & Scheurman, G. (1998). Actual and virtual reality: making the most of field trips. Social Education 62 (1), 35-40. Bennett, L., & Berson, M. J. (Eds.). ( 2007). Digital age: Technology-based k-12 lesson plans for social studies. NCSS Bulletin 105 National Council for the Social Studies.

PAGE 82

74 Bentley, J. H. (2006). Traditions & encounters: A global perspective on the past 3rd ed. Glencoe-McGraw Hill: Blacklick, OH. Berson, M. (1996). Effectivene ss of Computer Technology in the Social Studies: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28 (4), 486-499. Berson, M. J. (2000). Reth inking research and pedagogy in the social studies: The creation of caring c onnections through technology. Theory & Research in Social Education 28 (1), 121-131. Berson, M. J., & Balyta, P. (2004). Technological thinking and practice in the social studies: Transcending the tumultuous adolescence of reform. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education 20 (4), 141-150. Berson, M. J., & Berson, I. (2003). Digit al literacy for effe ctive citizenship. Social Education, 67 (3), 164-167. Berson, M. J., & Berson, I. (2007). Ex ploring complex so cial phenomena with computer simulations. Social Education, 71 (3), 136-139. Berson, M. J., Lee, J. K., & Stuckart, D. W. (2001). Promise and practice of computer technology in the social st udies: A critical anal ysis. In W. B. Stanley (Ed.), Critical issues in the social studies research for the 21st century (pp. 209-229). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Berson, M. J., Mason, C. L., Heinecke, W. F., & Coutts, C. B. (2001). An examination of beliefs and practices of social studies methods faculty. The International Social Studies Forum 1 (2), 89-105.

PAGE 83

75 Bitter, G., Garten, C., Oppenheimer, T., & Otto, D. (2004, April). Understanding the next wave of technology Panel presentation at the meeting of the Milken Institute Global Conference, Los Angeles, CA. Bolick, C., Berson, M. J., Coutts, C., & W. He inecke (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. Bolick, C., Berson, M. J., Friedman, A. & Porteli, E. J. (2007). Diffusion of technology innovations in the preser vice social studies experience: Results of a national survey. Theory & Research in Social Education, 35 (2), 174-195. Bolick, C. M., McGlinn, M. M., & Siko, K. L. (2005). Twenty years of technology: A retrospective view of Social E ducation’s technology themed issues. Social Education, 69 (3), 155-161. Bowen, G. A. (2005). Prepar ing a qualitative research-based dissertation: lessons learned. The Qualitative Report, 10 (2), 208-222. Braun, J. A. (2002). Social studies education and technology: A rock and roll perspective. The International Social Studies Forum 2 (2), 167-169. Bull, G., Park, J., Searson, M., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Knezek, G. (2007). Editorial: Develo ping technology policies for effective classroom practice. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education {Online Serial}, 7 (3). Available: http://www.citejournal/vol7/i ss3/editorial/article1.cfm

PAGE 84

76 Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Cantu, D. A. (2000). Technol ogical integration in prehistory teacher education. Journal of the Association for History & Computing 3 ( 2 ). Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://mcel.pac ificu.edu/jahc/jahciii2/k12/cantu.htm CEO Forum (2000). The power of digital learning: integrati ng digital content. Washington, DC. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.ceoforum.org College Board (2007). World History c ourse description 2008-2009. New York, NY: College Board Advanced Placement Program. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://apcent ral.collegeboard.com/ Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and res earch design: choosing among five traditions Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Cronbach, L. J., & Azuma, H. (1962). Internal-consiste ncy reliability formulas applied to randomly sampled single fact or tests: An empirical comparison. Educational and Psychological Measurement 22 45-65. Cuban. L. (1994). Computers meet classroom: Who wins? Education Digest 59 (7), 50-54. Cuban, L. (1999). High-tech school, low-tech teaching. Education Digest 64 (5), 53-55. Cuban, L. (2002). Undersold & Underused: Comp uters in the classroom Cambridge Mass: Harvard University Press.

PAGE 85

77 Denzin, N. K., & Linc oln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DeWitt, S. W., & Horn, P. S. (2005). Ub iquitous computing: Are we crazy? Learning and Leading with Technology 32 ( 8 ), 6-8. Diem, R. (2000, Fall). Can it make a difference? Technology and the social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education 28(4), 493-501. Doolittle, P., & Hicks, D. (2003). Constructivism as a theoretical foundation for the use of technology in Social Studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 31 (1), 72-104. Eisenberg, M., & Johnson, D. (1996). Computer skills for information problem solving: learning and teaching technology in context Syracuse, NY: Educational Clearinghouse for Information and technology. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED392 463). Eui-Kyung, S. (2007a, July 25). Fostering global citizenship from a spatial framework with geospatial technology Paper presented at 2007 James F. Ackerman Colloquium on Technology and Citizenship Education, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. Eui-Kyung, S. (2007b, July 25). Us ing geographic information system (GIS) technology to enhance elementary student’s geographic understanding. Theory & research in Social Education, 35 (2), 231-255. Florida Department of E ducation (October, 2000). Educational technology plan framework for the state of Florida Retrieved August 15, 2006, from http://www.doe.firn.edu/edtech/Databases.shtml

PAGE 86

78 Florida Department of E ducation (October, 2002). Fl orida ed-tech strategic objectives. Retrieved De cember 23, 2005, from http://www.doe.firn.edu/edtech/ it/eett/objectives.html Florida Department of Educ ation (2007). Sunshine state standards: social studies grades 9-12. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.fldoe.org/bii/cu rriculum/sss/pdf/socstud9.pdf Friedman, A. (2006). State standards and digital primary sources: A divergence. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 6 (3). Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.citejournal.org/vol6/i ss3/socialstudies/article1.cfm Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Glaser, B. G., & Stra uss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory Chicago, IL: Aldine. Green, B., & Oksner, W. (1998). Integrating technology into the social studies curriculum/Intermediate Westminster, CA: Teacher Created Materials. Green, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-me thod evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11( 3 ) 255-274. Gurak, L. J. (2001). Cyberliteracy: Navigating t he internet with awareness New Haven, CT.: Yale University Press.

PAGE 87

79 Harmes, C., Kemker, K., Kalayd jian, K., & Barron, A. (2000). Working toward national technology standards: Teacher use of computers in the classroom Paper presented at the annual Meeting of the Florida Educational Research Associati on (FERA), Tallahassee, Florida. Healy, J. M. (1998). Failure to connect: How comput ers affect our children’s mind: For better and worse New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Hogarty, K. Y., Lang, T. R., & Kromrey, J. D. (2003). Another look at technology use in classrooms: The development and validation of an instrument to measure teachers’ perceptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement 63 (1), 139-162. International Society for Technol ogy in Education (ISTE). (2000). The national educational technology standards (NETS) project. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://cnets.iste.org/ International Society for Technology in Education. (2006 ). ISTE National Educational Technology Standards for Students Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://cnets.iste .org/students/s_stands.html International Society for Technology in Education (2007). The national educational technology standards fo r students: The next generation. Retrieved October 8, 2007, fr om http://cnets.iste.org/ Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher 33 ( 7 ) 14-26.

PAGE 88

80 Jones, T. H., & Paolucci, R. (1998). T he learning effectiveness of educational technology: A call for further research. Educational Technology Review, (9), 10-14. Keiper, T., Harwood, A., & Larson, B. E. (2000) Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of infusing computer technology into social studies instructions. Theory and Research in Social Education, 28 ( 4 ), 566-579. Kelly, T. M. (2006). The role of te chnology in World History teaching. World History Connected, 3 (3), 22. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://worldhistoryconnected.pr ess.uiuc.edu/3.3/kelly.html Kopkowski, C. ( 2006, March). Ready to upgrade? Untangling technology can be a daunting proposition. NEA Today Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.nea.org/neatoday /0603/index.html Krupnick, K. (1998). Dog sleds online: Creating a virtual field trip. Social Studies Review 38 (1), 43-46. LearnOutLoud.com (2007). LearnOutLoud history audi o and visual tools Retrieved October 10, 2007, from Learnhttp://www.learnoutloud.com/Podcast-Directory Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

PAGE 89

81 Lipscomb, G. B., Guenther, L. M. & Mc Leod, P. (2007). Sounds good to me: Using digital audio in the social studies classroom. Social Education, 71 (30), 120-124. Mason, C., Berson, M. J ., Diem, R., Hicks, D., Lee, J., & Dralle, T. (2000). Guidelines for using technology to prepare social studies teachers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 1 (1), 107116. Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Metiri Group (2006). Technology in schools: What research says Cisco Systems. Retrieved October 9, 2007, from http://cisco.com/ Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technologi cal pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrati ng technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017-1054. MIT. (2007). MIT visualizing cultures Retrieved on October 10, 2007, from http://ocw.mit.edu/ans7870/21f/21f.027j/menu/ National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (1997). Technology and the new professional teacher Preparing for the 21st century. National Council for Accredi tation of Teacher Education Task Force on Technology. Retriev ed October 8, 2007, from http://www.ncate.org/accred/ projects/tech/tech-21.htm National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2000). National Standards for Technology in Teacher Preparation Retrieved August 15, 2006, from http://www.is te.org/standards/ncate/index.html

PAGE 90

82 National Council for the Social Studies (2006). Technology position statement and guidelines. Social Education 70 (5), 329-332. National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for the social studies (Bulletin 89). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studi es Curriculum Standards Task Force. National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers. (2006). Preparing teachers to use technology. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://cnets.iste.org/teachers/t_book.html Newmark, M. (2000). Getti ng beyond the west: The internet and World History. Journal of the Association of History and Computing, 3 (3), 1-3. North Central Regional Educationa l Laboratory (NCREL), (2003). enGauge 21st Century Skills: Literacy in the Digital Age Naperville, IL: NCREL. Panel on Educational Technol ogy, President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology. (1997, March). Report to the President on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www. ostp.gov/PCAST/k-12ed.html Partnership for 21st Centur y Skills (2007, October 10). U.S. students need 21st Century Skills to compete in a global economy Retrieved October 10, 2007, from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/ Postman, N. (1995). Virtual students, digital classroom. Nation, 261 ( 111 ), 377383. Postman, N. (2000). Will our children only inherit the wind? Theory and Research in Social Education, 28 (4), 580-586.

PAGE 91

83 Risinger, C. F. (1996). Webbing the social studies: Using Internet and World Wide Web resources in social studies instruction. Social Education 60 ( 2 ), 111-112. Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations The Free Press: New York, New York. Rose, S. A., & Winterfeldt, H. F. (1999). Waking the Sleeping Giant: A Learning Community in Social Studies Methods and Technology Social Education, 62 (3), 151-152. SAS. (2005). SAS-9 Intelligence Platform Available: http://www. sas.com SASI Group & Newman, M. (2007). Worldmapper.org Sheffield, UK: Social and Spatial Inequalities Research Group. Saye, J. W., & Brush, T.A. (2002). Scaffo lding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedi a-supported learni ng environments. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50 (3), 77-96. Saye, J. W., & Brush, T.A. (2007) Using technology-enhanced learning environments to support problem-based historical inquiry in secondary school classrooms. Theory & Research in Social Education, 35 (2), 196230. Schrum, L., Thompson, A., Maddux, C., Spr ague, D., Bull, G., & Bell, L. (2007). Editorial: Research on the effect iveness of technology in schools: The roles of pedagogy and content. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 7 (1). Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.citejournal.org/vol7/ iss1/editorial/article1.cfm

PAGE 92

84 SCORE. (2004). Domains of history and social st udies thinking in related to information literacy Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://score.rims.k12.ca.us/infolit/ SDHC. (2005). School District of Hillsbor ough County facts 2005-2006. Retrieved August 30, 2006, from http://apps1. sdhc.k12.fl.us/info/facts0506.pdf Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher 15 (5), 4-14. Stearns, P. N. (2006). World Histo ry: Curriculum and controversy. World History Connected, 3 (3). Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://worldhistoryconnected.pr ess.uiuc.edu/3.3/stearns.html. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Tasharkkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Co mbining qualitative and quantitative approaches Applied Social Research Methods Series (Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Technology Counts. (2006). The informa tion edge: Using data to accelerate achievement. Education Week, 25 (35). Retrieved September 1, 2006 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/toc/2006/05/04/index.html U.S. Department of Education. (1996). Getting America’s students ready for the 21st century. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/o s/technology/plan/archive.html

PAGE 93

85 U.S. Department of Education. (2000a). E-Learning – Putting a world-class education at the fingert ips of all children Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/o s/technology/plan/archive.html U.S. Department of Education. (2000b). Teachers' tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers' use of technology Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/frss /publications/2000102/index.asp U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Toward a new golden age in American education-How the Internet, t he law and today’s students are revolutionizing expectation. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/o s/technology/plan/index.html U.S. Department of Education. (2005). In ternet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms: 1994–2003. Retriev ed October 8, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch /pubsinfo.asp?p ubid=2005015 Vincent, T., & van’t Hooft, M. (2007). For kids, by kids: Our city Podcast. Social Education, 71 (3), 125-129. Whitworth, S. A., & Berson, M. J. (2003). Computer te chnology in the social studies: An examination of the e ffectiveness literature (1996-2001). Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 2 (4), 472509. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.citejournal.org/vol2/i ss4/socialstudies/article1.cfm Wilson, E.K., Rice, M.L., Bagley, W., & Rice, M.K. (2000). Virtual fieldtrips in the newsrooms: Integrating tec hnology into the classroom. Social Education, 64 (3), 152-155.

PAGE 94

86 Appendix A Data Collection Timeline QUAN/qual Survey data collected: November-December, 2006 QUAN/qual QU AN data entry: January, 2007 QUAL Follo w-up data collected: January-May, 2007 Follow-up data entered: May-June, 2007 QUAN/qual QUAN/ qual data analysis: July-August, 2007 QUAN/qual Resu lts interpreted: August, 2007

PAGE 95

87 Appendix B Researcher Script Hello, my name is Thank you for including me in your meeting agenda today. I am conducting a research study that examines what types of technology are being used in secondary World History classes and how they are being integrated. This study serves to add to the empirical data and to guide social studies teachers in the use of technology not only as a learning tool but to assist and encourage other educators in their ow n endeavors to incorporate technology into the curriculum. Your teachers may opt to remain anonymous. However, if teachers are using technology in innovative ways, I would like to interview them further to document their use in their classroom. T here is a section in the survey that explains this to your teachers. Your participation in this study is very valuable and having each of your World History teachers complete the survey is important to the quality of data analysis. Please give a survey to each teacher of World History in your department. Ask that they complete the survey and return it to you by Place all surveys in the addressed envelope provided. Once you have received all completed surveys please return them to your di strict supervisor’s office by ____

PAGE 96

88 Appendix C Packet Cover Sheet World History Teachers Technology Study School Instructions: 1) Please give a survey to each Worl d History teacher in your department. 2) Ask that they complete the surv ey and return it to you by _____ 3) Place all surveys in the addre ssed, stamped envelope provided. 4) Once you have received all comple ted surveys, return them in the addressed, stamped envelope provided by ____ 5) How many teachers in your department teach World History? 6) How many completed surveys are enclosed?

PAGE 97

89 Appendix D Informed Consent Form Space below reserved for IRB Stamp – Please leave blank Informed Consent for an Adult Social and Behavioral Sciences University of South Florida Information for People Who T ake Part in Re search Studies The following information is being present ed to help you decide whether or not you want to participate in a research study. Please read this carefully. Title of research study: Secondary World History Teachers’ Integration of Technology Into the classroom Person in charge of study: Shelli A. Whitworth Where the study will be done: All high schools in your school district Should you take part in this study? This form tells you about this research st udy. You can decide if you want to take part in it. You do not have to take part. Reading this form can help you decide. Why is this research being done? The purpose of this study is to gain a better understanding of how educators use technology in the classroom. Responses wi ll be kept strictly confidential and individual responses wil l not be identified. Plan of Study The survey includes sections addressing levels of confidence and comfort, general school support, technical support, types of software use by teachers, types of software use by students, integr ation of technology in the classroom, personal use, affinity toward computer use, and aversion towa rd computer use. Additional questions will allow you to writ e how you are using technology in your classroom. The survey should take approxim ately 15-20 minutes to complete the survey. If you are interested you may che ck on the survey to be contacted by the researcher to offer more details on y our innovative lessons using technology. Your participation is voluntary. Refusal to participate will not re sult in any penalty or loss of benefits. You may withdraw your participation at any time.

PAGE 98

90 Benefits of Taking Part Your responses will help the researc her understand technology use in the your field. In the past such data has been us ed to assist districts in obtaining technology, grants, and materials for teachers. Payment for Participation You will not be paid for taking part in this survey. Incentives will be offered to those that complete the su rvey. A $50.00 gift certificat e for Wal-Mart will be given to each of two randomly drawn partici pants who complete a drawing form upon returning their completed surveys. A dditionally, one partici pants will be randomly selected to attend the Florida Educati onal Technology Conference in 2007 at no cost to the teacher includi ng paid registration fees to attend and one night hotel expenses. What are the risks if you take part in this study? There are no known risks to those who take part in this study. What will we do to keep your study records private? Responses will be kept strictly confidential and individual responses will not be identified. Federal law requires us to keep your study records private: € The USF Institutional Review Board (IRB) € The United States Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Questions and Contacts € If you have any questions about this research study, contact Shelli Whitworth at (813) 974-9055. € If you have questions about your rights as a person who is taking part in a research study, you may contact the Division of Research Compliance of the University of South Florida at ( 813) 974-5638. Consent to Take Part in this Research Study

PAGE 99

91 Appendix E X World History Teachers

PAGE 100

92

PAGE 101

93

PAGE 102

94

PAGE 103

95 Appendix F Open-Ended Survey Questions Instructions: The following items pertain to your responses on page 3 of the survey, in the sections entitled “Types of Software….” and “Integration of Computers…” Please respond to the following: 1) Briefly describe a lesson, activity, or project you conduct in your classes that incorporates the use of co mputer technology by students in class? Please use the back of the paper if needed. 2) How does the use of com puter technology in this le sson, activity, or project enhance student learning? Please use t he back of the paper if needed. 3) What is the most challenging aspect of implementing this lesson, activity, or project in your classes? Please use the back of the paper if needed. Detach here if you wish for your responses to re main anonymous Thank you for sharing information about your use of computer technology A $50.00 gift certificate for Wal-Mart will be given to each of two randomly drawn participants who complete the informati on below upon returning their completed survey. The researcher would like to c ontact you for further details on your lesson, activity, or project described abov e. If you agree to be contacted you will be entered for a drawing to attend the Florida Educational Technology Conference in January, 2007. The winner will receive a district provided substitute teacher and paid registrati on fees and one night hot el to attend. Your Name: School: Email Address: Phone: _____ Yes, you may contact me about my responses above _____ No, please do not contact me about my responses above

PAGE 104

96 Appendix G Rater Categories Sheet

PAGE 105

97 Appendix H Member Checking & Interview Script Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. Your willingness to share how you are using technology is valuable to the field. The reason fo r this meeting is to verify my understanding of the lesson you discussed in your written response on the technology survey. 1) I’d like to verify the software used in the le sson you conduct with your students. You reported that you use __________________? (read off ratings checked by reviewers) Is this correct. 2) You reported that you integrate this technology in/for ___________________________? Is this correct? (read off ratings checked by reviewers) 3) Other ways that you could integrate this te chnology include (Read off non-checked items). Do you use this lesson in any of these capacities? 4) There are a variety of skills that one can obtain that are part of living in the technology world of the 21st century. The following is a list of those 21st Century Skills. Your reported lesson was rated as incorporating the following skills? Is this correct? (Teachers will be given a copy of these definitions and descript ions of read these over the phone). 5) The National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) has a position statement on effective uses of technology in the classroom. I have a few questions about how your lesson addresses some of NCSS technology standards: a. Does using this technology extend learning beyond what could be done without technology? b. In what context do you use this technolo gy: How does the use of technology enhance students’ knowledge of content? How doe s the use of technology enhance social studies skills? c. Do your students explore content that pertains to relationships among sciences and technology and society in this lesson? d. How might this lesson foster citizenship skills? 6) What textbook are you currently using? Does this text offe r any support of computers or technology in the classroom? (If yes, please explain). 7) Is there anything else that you would like to share about the lesson? 8) Do you have a copy of the le sson instructions, handouts that y ou provide to your students, or sample work that you would like to

PAGE 106

98 Appendix I Teacher “A” Sample Project Muslim Culture Brochure Assignment Create a travel brochure illustrating the accomp lishments of the Muslim empire. Make sure to include the following topics: • General Muslim culture • Importance of Baghdad • Role of Women • Advancements in medicine, math, astronomy • Art and literature You may work with a partner or individually. Grading Criteria: 1. Inclusion of all required topics (refer to the above list) 2. The use of at least two credible internet sources as discussed in class. 3. Provide citations in MLA format. 4. Cover page including a title and illustration 5. Brochure must be include 3 folds 6. The brochure must include both text and illust rations (at least one illustration per page). You may use draw your illustrations or use pictures from the intern et (as long as you cite the source). 7. Make sure to use your own words for explanations. NOTE: Remember you are creating a brochure to attract people to come see the Muslim World. Make sure to be neat and or ganized. Make sure to color your illustrations. Yo u will be graded on the completeness, accuracy and organization of your work. DUE DATE: ________________

PAGE 107

99 Appendix J Teacher “D” Sample Project AP World History: Team Presentation Project Instructions : You will be in teams of 4-5. You are to build a PowerPoint presentation that thoroughly discusses one of the topics listed below. Topics will be assigned. In, addition, each team is to provide a written summary of their topics as indicated. 1. History of Southeast Asia from 800 BCE to 1450 CE. Describe and analyze the impact if t he Chinese on Southeast Asia from 800 BCE to 1450 CE. To what extent were cultural interchanges? Reciprocal? 2. History of Korea from 800 BCE to 1450 CE Describe and analyze the impact of Chinese on Korea from 800BCE to 1450 CE. To what extent were cu ltural interchanges reciprocal? 3. Voyages of Zheng He Describe and analyze the impact of the voyages of Zheng He on AsianAfrican trade and politics. To what exte nt is the Ming Dynasty’s decision to end the voyages sympathetic to China’s culture? 4. The Spice Islands (East Indies) Describe and analyze the role of the spice trade in global economics from 100 to 1450 CE. What role did various cu ltures play in either changing or continuing this trade throughout the centuries? Specific Requirements : PowerPoint Presentations: 1. No more than 14 slides 2. Logical order, cover all aspects of t opics – thesis statement, chronology, PECS, CCOT 3. Speaking notes must be on Notes Pages 4. Save to flash drive Written Summaries: 1. Typed, double spaced, Times New Roman 2. Turned in at time of presentation along with black and white copy of Notes Pages from presentation. 3. Type team names on front page of summary along with heading that indicates topics. 4. Save to flash drive. Grading : Presentation 50 points Summary 50 points Peer Evaluations 50 points

PAGE 108

100 Appendix K Teacher “F” Sample Project Renaissance Brochure Directions Background: The Renaissance begins in Italy at the close of the Middle Ages. It is called the “rebirth” because it is a time when there is an explosion of art, learning, and creativity. Task: Imagine you and you partner are a time travel agents who are trying to convince the public to buy your latest “vacation” – a trip back in time to the period known as Renaissance. With a partner you will be assigned, you will create a tr i-fold brochure that advertises the benefits of experiencing the Renaissance and highlights a sp ecial limited edition excursion that focuses on one element of life during this time period. Requirements: 1. Title/cover pages – introduces the Renaissance and why one would travel to that time period (10 points) 2. Inside panel #1 – introduces your specia l excursion topic by describing the basic characteristics of this t hese during the Renaissance: (10 points) Art Architecture Literature Philosophy Politics/Government 3. Inside panel #2 and #3 gives at least 3 spec ific examples of work that would be seen on a tour that focuses on your special topics. Mu st include a description and an illustration of each work. (30 points) 4. Back panel – includes a bibliography/works ci tes of each source you use to create your brochure. You must use at least 3 different sources. (10 points) 5. Brochure must be created using Microsoft Publisher 6. Spelling, grammar, publishing skills, presentati on and creativity will be a factor in the final grade.

PAGE 109

101 Appendix L School District Approval to Collect Data

PAGE 110

102 Appendix M Exempt Certification IRB Approval

PAGE 111

103 Appendix M Continued Exempt Certification IRB Approval

PAGE 112

104 Appendix N Budget Incentives 2 gift cards at $50.00 each $100 1 Registration fess to Florida Educational Technology Conference $175.00 1 Night hotel stipend for conference attendance $89.00 Copies Surveys, instructions, informed consent $23.00 Total: $387.00

PAGE 113

105 About the Author Shelli A. Whitworth is a doctoral candida te in Secondary Education, Curriculum and Instruction with cognate areas in inst ructional technology and educational leadership at the University of South Fl orida (USF) and an Instructor at Saint Leo University (SLU). She researches topics re lating to effective use of technology to further students’ knowledge of social st udies through democratic education and historical literacy. She holds a Mast ers of Arts degree in Secondary Social Science Education and a Bachelors of Arts in Psychology. She instructs courses in general educational psychology, classroom management, middle and secondary curriculum/philosophy, and soci al sciences teaching methodology. She also mentors interns within local school districts. She served as Chair of the nationwide Graduate Student Special Interest Group of the College and University Faculty Assembly (CUFA). She was formerly an instructor at USF, and a social sciences teacher and Student In tervention Specialist in the School District of Hillsborough C ounty, Tampa, Florida.


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam Ka
controlfield tag 001 001969560
003 fts
005 20081118083816.0
006 m||||e|||d||||||||
007 cr mnu|||uuuuu
008 081118s2007 flu sbm 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0002246
035
(OCoLC)272690294
040
FHM
c FHM
049
FHMM
090
LB1601 (ONLINE)
1 100
Whitworth, Shelli A.
0 245
Secondary world history teachers' integration of technology into the classroom :
b a mixed-method approach
h [electronic resource] /
by Shelli A. Whitworth.
260
[Tampa, Fla.] :
University of South Florida,
2007.
3 520
ABSTRACT: In the social studies classroom, using technology, students may gain access to expansive knowledge, broaden their exposure to diverse people and perspectives, and engage in critical thinking activities necessary for citizenship education (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Berson & Berson, 2003; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; NCSS, 1994, 2006; Risinger, 1996; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). 21st Century Skills are valuable for students as they examine vast amounts of content relating to historical events, figures, societies, technological growth and examine the relationship of the content to today's global interactions. Research indicates that there remains a call for documentation of exemplary uses beyond that of research and basic presentation tools (Berson & Balyta, 2004; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Kopkowski, 2006; NCSS, 2006; NEA, 2004; Technology Counts, 2006; U.S. Department of Education, 2004, 2005; Whitworth & Berson, 2003).^ The continued need for research in the field should address the intersection of content, current effective technology practice, and pedagogy of innovative uses of technology in the classroom while offering a model or steps for use (Berson, 1996; Berson & Balyta, 2004; Berson, Lee, & Stuckart, 2001; Bolick, McGlinn, & Siko, 2005; Braun, 2002; Bull et al., 2007; CUFA Opening Session, 2005; Diem, 2000; Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; McGlinn, 2007; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; NCSS, 2006; Shulman, 1986; Whitworth & Berson, 2003). This study examined the types of technology being used in secondary World History classes and how they are being integrated. The study utilized a mixed-method approach using a survey instrument, Perceptions of Computers and Technology, designed to measure the types of software and integration of technology use in classrooms.^ Written responses and follow-up of randomly selected cases served to provide complementary data to elaborate and clarify results from the quantitative portions of the analysis (Hogarty, Lang, & Kromrey, 2003; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003).
502
Dissertation (Ph.D.)--University of South Florida, 2007.
504
Includes bibliographical references.
516
Text (Electronic dissertation) in PDF format.
538
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
500
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains 105 pages.
Includes vita.
590
Co-adviser: Michael J. Berson, Ph.D.
Co-adviser: J. Howard Johnston, Ph.D.
653
Research.
Computers.
Schools.
Social studies.
TPCK.
690
Dissertations, Academic
z USF
x Secondary Education
Doctoral.
773
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?e14.2246