UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date: 13-Oct-2010 I, Susan Farber , hereby submit this original work as part of the requirements for the degree of: Doctor of Education in Curriculum & Instruction It is entitled: The Effect of Guided Self-Reflection on Teachers' Technology Use Student Signature: Susan Farber This work and its defense approved by: Committee Chair: James Basham, PhD James Basham, PhD Kay Seo, PhD Kay Seo, PhD Catherine V. Maltbie, EdD Catherine V. Maltbie, EdD Holly Johnson, PhD Holly Johnson, PhD 11/12/2010 1,208 The Effect of Guided Self-Reflection on Teachers’ Technology Use A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in the School of Education Of the College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services by Susan Farber, M.A., M.Ed. October 13, 2010 Committee Chair: James D. Basham, Ph.D. Abstract The purpose of this study was to pilot an instructional planning tool grounded in guided self-reflection on the instructional planning practices and instructional behaviors of a small sample of teachers. I designed the instructional planning tool, which was named the Informed Technology Integration Guide (ITIG). Participants used the instructional planning tool to document their definitions of effective technology use, their selection of resources (traditional instructional and digital or emergent technologies) and instructional strategies to facilitate students’ exploration of topics and skills based on standards and instructional goals. The ITIG provided a sequence of self-reflection questions to facilitate teachers’ evaluation of the instructional activity documented in the ITIG. These questions focused on how well the use of technology supported the instructional goals of the activity. Through observations, interviews, and analyses of submitted ITIGs, I collected triangulated data to create a rich, descriptive narrative to share these participants’ decisions concerning the use of technology to support instruction and student learning. Participants also provided survey data to determine their level of technology use and their beliefs about the role of technology in education, while recognizing contextual factors impacting technology use decisions. The survey instrument, observation and interview protocols were modified from prior research investigating technology use levels and effective instructional strategies. This pilot of the instructional planning tool, survey, and protocols yielded evidence that teachers’ documentation and reflection on their instructional planning impacted their decisions concerning the instruction they were planning. Participants recognized the power of reflection to guide them to enhance their use of technology and expand their awareness and consideration of alternative forms of emerging and traditional instructional technologies to impact student iii learning. They also realized the degree to which their use of technology aligned with instructional strategies they employ to create effective activities. Some participants viewed technology as a central aspect of contemporary life and demonstrated the process of technology transparency (Bruce & Hogan, 1998). I also present evidence of the need to reconsider how we measure effective technology use levels. Many research teams tend to use survey data and frequency counts, which omit the contextual factors and interrelationship of technology use amid content area curricular goals. I propose the need to consider and document how well teachers develop skills in blending the selection of technology, resources, instructional strategies, and pedagogy to address students’ needs and infrastructural realities to measure technology use levels. As this study is preliminary, additional investigation of the benefit, usability and sustainability of this instructional planning tool with a significantly larger and more diverse sample will offer guidance as to the impact of guided self-reflection to enhance teachers’ instructional planning and enactment, as well as nurture more consistent technology integration. iv Copyright © 2010 by Susan Farber All Rights Reserved v Acknowledgements As with any complex, long-term project, many people contributed to its successful outcome. First and foremost, the faculty members of the Programs of Teacher Education and Educational Studies have been encouraging and expressed interest in my work during the six years I have invested as a doctoral student and as a novice researcher. The collegiality the faculty extended to me over time provided me with direction, as well as a sense of where future paths may lead. The members of my committee contributed to my success. Dr. James Basham, chair, reminded me time and time again of the study’s potential impact, as we discussed the findings and its ramifications for teachers’ grasp of instructional design and the role of technology in teaching and learning. Dr. Holly Johnson correctly insisted on revisions to increase the integrity and rigor of this study and often suggested more effective phrasing to communicate ideas. Dr. Cathy Maltbie guided me through research design and methodology as I changed topics and revised the focus of my research. Cathy has been a guiding force as she helped me structure my ideas during the course of data analysis. Dr. Kay Seo reminded me of the need to explain assumptions and the rationale for my decisions as a researcher. The staff of the University Library for the College of Education has always been helpful in explaining the complexities of locating materials in various collections and databases. Ms Cheryl Ghosh expressed interest in my work, along the way as well as attending the defense of this dissertation. I also wish to acknowledge the guidance and assistance of Audra Morrison, who edited and checked the final document so it would comply with formatting requirements. I wish to thank many friends and acquaintances for the understanding and encouragement during these past six years. Many members of my faith community and friends understood why I vi was so engaged in reading, writing and thinking, and encouraged me along the way through the final step. Many of them are like extended family in their willingness to help me out and brainstorm when I needed some assistance with problem solving. Finally, my family’s patience and love made it all possible. My husband, James, has been a real trooper through all of this process. My almost adult children, Adina and Jared, accepted the few times that I was not as available to help them with their studies and discussions of life’s concerns when someone is a teenager. My parents, who wondered if I completely lost my common sense to return to school in this economic climate, now realize that my goal to help teachers empower themselves as reflective instructional designers has merit and potential. Concluding that effective teaching and technology use is supported by critical reflection or cyclical evaluation of what happens in classrooms, documented through an instructional planning tool (such as the ITIG), may seem like an over-simplistic proposal to nurture consistent technology integration. I look forward to the opportunities to empower teachers as our role as educators has become increasingly challenging in the past decades. vii Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................1 Statement of Problem.........................................................................................................................................................3 Questions Guiding the Study ...........................................................................................................................................4 Definition of Terms..............................................................................................................................................................5 Background.............................................................................................................................................................................9 Theoretical Framework.................................................................................................................................................. 11 Researcher Bias.................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Significance .......................................................................................................................................................................... 23 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................ 25 Chapter 2 Literature Review.......................................................................................................... 26 Why Teachers Integrate Technology........................................................................................................................ 27 Variable Levels of Technology Integration ............................................................................................................ 31 Focus on Technology Training ...................................................................................................................................