Research Summary

Technology is becoming more prevalent in the everyday lives of people throughout the world. We have entered into an information age where students need to become more advanced in their uses for technology in an academic setting to support them in their future. Studies suggest that students use more technology at home than they do at school (Lee and Spires 2009). Students use technology for networking, researching, gaming, and sharing information with others at home. Why not transfer some of that knowledge to the academic sector? Teachers are struggling to apply technology in their classes and use the technology in a rigorous manner. It is a challenge for teachers to implement appropriate technology into classes today because some teachers are not as technologically savvy as the students. Using the technology in class can be a way that students can learn about themselves as well as academia (Hansen 2008).

Historically, technical thinking in schools has been considered intangible (Hansen 2008). A case study was done by a teacher in elementary school who wanted to measure the level of engagement of her class as a whole (Swan, Kratcoski, Hooft, & Campbell 2007). She knew that different students were engaged at different times of the day, but it was typically in the subject matter they were most interested in. She used a variety of different technologies in the classroom such as wireless write pads, document cameras, and student response systems. She also included a module lacking technology. Using observations by fellow teachers and student self-reports she concluded that technology in the classroom increased student engagement. Her goal, however, was to increase engagement of the whole class, and not just a few students. The study concluded that the student response systems increased student engagement of the class as a whole more than the document camera and the wireless writing pads. Students relate more to having a hand-held device of their own because they all have hand-held devices at home for themselves (Hansen 2008).
During the four phases of this study, the teacher incorporated various methods of technology to measure whole class engagement. The document camera phase allowed the students to share their work with everyone and work on a large screen in front of the room. This, however, did not increase the engagement of the whole class, but only the student whose work was displayed at that time on the camera (Swan, Kratcoski, Hooft, & Campbell 2007). The writing pad phase elicited more student engagement than the document camera, however it was also not engaging for the entire class. The last phase of the project was using the student survey systems. These are handheld devices for each student that allow them to respond to a question anonymously. This engaged most all students because they enjoyed the anonymity of their responses as well as a chart that displayed all students’ answers. Answers could then be discussed as to which was correct and why the others were incorrect. This was the device that captured all students’ attention and allowed the student to have individual attention placed upon him (Hansen 2008).
Observations taken from each class and student self-reports were compiled to form the conclusion of the study (Swan, Kratcoski, Hooft, & Campbell 2007). Observations were recorded by teachers to measure each student at a certain point during the lesson. These observations concluded that of all technologies used, the student survey systems engaged all students more than the other uses of technology. Student self reports were also used after each class where technology was used. These were surveys given to the students where they responded to questions about their own feelings about using technology in the specific classroom activity. Students answered that the technology “made learning more fun” and it made them “pay more attention”.
Overall this study elicits that technology in the classroom increases engagement, but the most efficient way to increase whole class engagement is to provide each student with his or her own device to participate (Swan, Kratcoski, Hooft, & Campbell 2007). Student testimonials were recorded after using the student response systems. Some of the statements are as follows:
“I loved it. I want to do it again. Please”
“It was fun how no one knows how you answered.”
Consistent reports state that using technology in the classroom increases student engagement and makes it possible for them to actively participate in the whole class activity.
Hansen suggests that we need to bridge the gap between what students use at home in regards to technology and how they use technology at school. Currently education is behind in the way it uses technology in the classroom. Students are more advanced and more dependent on technology than teachers. Students appreciate more real-world applications that use different technologies such as Mp3s, PDAs, and computers when it comes to using technology in school say Hansen. Students appreciate the rigor and authenticity that technology is able to bring to the learning process because they feel that it will better prepare them for their future. Unfortunately, according to Hansen, the percentage of students in computer classes in the upper grades is less than 15%, making the technology gap even larger.
In a perfect world, technology in schools would match that of home usage by students today. One day…….



Bibliography
Swan, K., Kratcoski, A., van’tHooft, M., Campbell, D. (2007). Technology support for whole class engagement. [Elctronic version]. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 3(1).
Hansen, R. (2008). The roots of technical learning and thinking: situating TLT in schools. [Electronic version]. Journal of Technology Education, 20(1), 5-15.
Lee, J., Spires, H. (2009). What students think about technology and academic engagement in school: implications for middle grades teaching and learning. [Electronic version]. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education Journal, 17(2), 61-81.