Comparing a practitioner's concerns over technology integration between two pedagogical preference groups: inquiry-based teachers and traditional teachers. This study looks for relationships between the pedagogical groups in their concerns for integrating technology, use of technology to enhance learning and application of integration practices.

1. Thesis Defense
Ashley Mayor
School ofTeaching and Learning
Illinois State University
May 2015

2. • Quantitative Study
• Measuring Practitioner’s Concerns and Perceptions
• Area of Focus:Technology Integration
• Pedagogical Practice Considered: Inquiry-based Learning
• Comparison: Inquiry-based Learning vs.Traditional Pedagogical Practices
Introduction
2

3. Statement of the Problem
1) Practitioner’s Challenge: Teachers are expected to integrate
technology into their learning environment with little training, support, or
implementation phase-in process
- Sanchez (2011)
- New Media Consortium (2013)
- ISTE (2009)
- Ottenbriet-Leftwich, et al. (2010)
3

4. Statement of the Problem
2) Enriching Integration: The focus should not be on mere use of
technology, but rather, integration of technology into the classroom in
authentic and enriching ways
- Clark & Kozma Debate (What enhances learning?)
- SAMR (Puentedura, 2013)
-TPACK (Mishra & Koehler, 2006)
4

5. Statement of the Problem
3) Obstacles of Concern: Teachers’ level and types of concerns effect
their decision making over technology use
-TechnologyAcceptance Model (TAM) (Holden & Rada,2011)
- Inner Drive and Personal Beliefs (Ertmer et al., 2007)
- Attitudes and Beliefs (Tondeur, Kershaw,Vanderlinde, & van Braak, 2013)
5

6. Statement of the Problem
4)Teacher’s Role Shift: Pedagogical practice changes as technology is
integrated effectively
- Redesigning the role: Orchestration (Scanlon,Anastopolou, Kerawalla, 2012)
-Teaching students a process of learning, not merely content to be mastered (21st
Century Skills)
- NTeQ (Morrison & Lowther, 2010) Best Practice = student-centered learning
- ISTE Standards •T (ISTE, 2008)
-Technology = wrong driver, Pedagogy = right driver (Fullan, 2011)
6

7. Statement of the Problem
Review
7
1) Practitioner’s Challenge:Teachers are expected to integrate technology
into their learning environment with little training, support, or
implementation phase-in process
2) Enriching Integration: How to truly integrate technology
3)Obstacles of Concern:Teachers’ concerns effect their technology use
4)Teacher’s Role Shift: Pedagogical practice must change to integrate
technology effectively

8. 8
Inquiry-based Learning Integration ofTechnology
Form Instructional Method Instructional Practice
Benefits - Interdisciplinary use
- Learning as a cycle/process
- Student-centered
- Authentic
- Developing deeper understandings,
questioning, and reasoning
- Enhances learning experience
- Individualizes learning
- Interest and motivation heightened
- Opportunity for world-wide collaboration
- Production of new knowledge not just
consumption
- Organizational management
Concerns - Without scaffolding, “un-assisted
discovery”
- Teacher improvisation
- Lead to misconceptions/incomplete
knowledge
- Teachers unprepared to integrate
- The tool on it’s own can’t effect change
- Technology is the focus
Projection Inquiry-based learning can benefit from the
structure, resources, production tools, and
collaboration that technology can provide.
The integration of technology will facilitate
and enhance pedagogical practices to the
benefit of the learning experience.
Goal Teacher’s Goal: Provide the best quality learning experience possible for students.
Empowering learners to use 21st century skills engaged in enriching learning experiences.

9. Integration ofTechnology within Inquiry-based
Learning
• Progressive Inquiry (Villo, Seitamaa0-Hakkarainen, & Hakkarainen, 2012)
• Personal Inquiry Project (Scanlon, Anastopoulou, & Kerawalla, 2012)
• SMILE (Buckner & Kim, 2013)
• eMINTS (AIR, 2013)
• NTeQ (Morris & Lowther, 2010)
9
Literature

10. Objectives
10
• Describe concerns and perceptions practitioners have towards technology
integration.
• Compare the concerns and perceptions of practitioners using inquiry-based
pedagogical practices with practitioner perceptions using traditional
practices.
• Assess similarities and differences between practitioner perceptions using
varied pedagogical approaches.
• Recognize variations of technology integration practices.

11. Research Questions
1) Do differences occur between the beliefs/concerns of inquiry-based
teachers and traditional teachers about integrating technology to
enhance student learning?
2) Do differences occur between the perceived use of technology of inquiry-
based teachers and traditional teachers?
3) Do differences occur between the perceived technology integration
practices of inquiry-based teachers and traditional teachers?
11

12. Participant Recruitment
12
International School Public School
Participants CertifiedTeacher Practitioners CertifiedTeacher Practitioners
School Mission Statement
Instructional Practice
Inquiry-based learning Unspecified
Curriculum or Academic Program International Baccalaureate
Program
Common Core State Standards
Student Population K-12 Environment K-12 Environment
SchoolType International School Public School
Location European Union United States of America
Teachers Employed 27 teachers 41 teachers

13. Participant Response Rate
• 33 participants recruited (collectively)
• 93.94% valid response rate (31 of 33)
• International school response rate : 11 of 27 staff (40.74%)
• Public school response rate: 20 of 41 staff (48.78%)
13

14. Participant Demographics
• 1-5 years = 29%
• 6-10 years = 19%
• 11-15 years = 11%
• 16-20 years = 13%
• 21-25 years = 26%
• 26-30 years = 3%
• 31 + years = 0%
Years of
Experience
• Elementary School = 39%
• Middle School = 16%
• High School = 29%
• Multiple Levels = 16%
Level of Current
Teaching
Position
• Self-contained = 42%
• Not Self-contained = 58%
Type of
Classroom
14

15. Methodology
15
• Comparison Study
• Groups comprised of teacher practitioners according to pedagogical practice
• Quantitative Data Collection
• Patterns of concerns
• Patterns of perceived technology use
• Patterns of perceived integration application
• DependentVariables
• K-12 settings
• Teacher practitioners
• Technology integration
• IndependentVariables
• Pedagogical practices: Inquiry-based and traditional

16. Instrument
16
Stages of Concern
Questionnaire
Measuring the intensity of the
different stages of concern over an
innovation
Survey of 35 - Likert style rating
items
Southwest Educational
Development Laboratory (SEDL)
(2013)
Evaluating the Use of
Technology within
Pedagogy
Measuring the use of technology
and application of integration
practices
Survey of demographics and
practitioner perception, Likert style
rating and multiple choice items
Mayor (2014)

17. Instrument Scoring
Stages of Concern
• Concern profile data summated
• Composite Score identified as relative
intensity level of concern determined
for individual
• Scores are applied to designated group
totals
• Interpreted as inferential data –central
tendency (mean) is identified for each
group
17
Evaluating the Use ofTechnology within
Pedagogy
• Demographics itemized
• Grouping identifier #5
• Use of technology #6 & 7
• Application of integration practices
#13 – 16
• Summation of individual scores
• Composite Scores are applied to
designated group total
• Interpreted as inferential data- central
tendency (mean) is identified for each
group over each application

18. Grouping Procedure
• Results of Questionnaire Item #5 - Measuring the frequency of use of
inquiry-based teaching practices
• Categorical scale  assigned numeric values, increasing with frequency
• Standard of measure determined (range 9-36 points)
18
TraditionalTeachers
Group
(ranged 9-27 points)
Inquiry-based
Teachers Group
(ranged 28-36
points)

19. Subgroup Profiles
19
TraditionalTeaching
Group
Inquiry-based
Teaching Group
Number of
participants
17 14
Setting of
participants
6 international
11 public school
5 international
9 public school
Levels taught Elementary: 5
Middle school: 4
High school: 6
Multiple Levels: 2
Elementary: 7
Middle school: 1
High school: 3
Multiple Levels: 3
Median years
experience
integrating
technology
3 years 4.5 years
Percentage of group
reporting formal
training
59% 64%

20. Results
Research Question 1
20
Descriptive Analysis Comparing Stages of Concern
Groups n X SD Skewness
Traditional Teachers 17 129.65 29.41 -.32
Inquiry-based Teachers 14 139.43 34.18 -.23
Inferential Analysis Comparing Stages of Concern
Description of t-test t df P
Comparison of Level of Concern Towards
Technology Integration for Traditional and
Inquiry-based Teachers
-.86 29 .40
Do differences occur between the beliefs/concerns of inquiry-based teachers and
traditional teachers about integrating technology to enhance student learning?

21. Results
Research Question 2
21
Descriptive Analysis Comparing Frequency of Use
Groups n X SD Skewness
Traditional Teachers 17 20.94 8.44 .30
Inquiry-based Teachers 14 26.14 4.74 .02
Inferential Analysis Comparing Frequency of Use
Description of t-test t df p
Comparison of Frequency of Use of
Technology for Traditional and
Inquiry-based Teachers
-2.16 25.92 .04
Do differences occur between the perceived use of technology of inquiry-
based teachers and traditional teachers?

22. Results
Research Question 3
22
Descriptive Analysis Comparing Technology Integration Application
Groups N X SD Skewness
Traditional Teachers 10 9.00 3.89 1.08
Inquiry-based Teachers 12 7.75 2.09 0.90
Inferential Analysis Comparing Technology Integration Application
Description of t-test t df P
Comparison of Technology Integration
Application for Traditional and Inquiry-
based Teachers
.96 20 .35
Do differences occur between the perceived technology integration practices
of inquiry-based teachers and traditional teachers?

23. Accepted Hypotheses
23
(1) The relationship between inquiry-based teachers
and traditional teachers was not significant
regarding their level of concern over technology
integration.
(2) A significant difference occurred over the perceived
use of technology for inquiry-based teachers, in
relation to traditional teachers.
(3) The relationship between inquiry-based teachers
and traditional teachers was not significant
regarding their perceived ability to integrate
technology.

24. No statistically significant difference was found between
pedagogical practice groups over the concern of
technology integration.
THIS STUDY:The concerns of teachers using inquiry-based practices are
similar to the concerns of teachers using traditional practices.
24
Discussion
Barriers Plausible Causes
- Inner drive and personal beliefs
(Ertmer, 2007)
- Attitude greatest predictor (Holden &
Rada, 2011)
- Teachers resist integrating
- Concern over integration is not the
only concern
- Professional development lacking
(NMC Horizon Report, 2013)
- Inexperience teaching (Clark, 2002;
Benton-Borghi, 2013)
- Pedagogical practice does not impact
integration concerns
- eMINTS difference in results (AIR, 2013)

25. Frequent use of technology
does not indicate integration
THIS STUDY: Significant differences between pedagogies over use, but with no significant
difference between the two methods and their perceived integration practices.
Problem: Concern over using technology in authentic and enriching ways.
• Transformation of Learning (Puentedura, 2013)
• “Student technology use does not guarantee students will be engaged in active learning
promoted by constructivist educators” (Niederhauser & Lindstrom, 2006, p. 98).
• Observations and interviews design – similar findings (Tondeur et al., 2013)
25
Discussion
Plausible Cause
Subgroups not different enough
True integration is yet to be achieved by the majority of teachers

26. Orchestrating Learning (Integration with Inquiry)
THIS STUDY:The relationship between
inquiry-based teachers and traditional
teachers was not significant regarding
their perceived ability to integrate
technology.
Conclusion: Inquiry alone, and technology
alone, are not independently substantial in
improving the quality of learning.
A need/expectation to integrate
technology, focus on how
26
Designer
Coach
Learner
manager
(Sharples &
Anastopoulou, 2012)
Moderator
TEACHER IS
Enhances the
pedagogy
Is the
infrastructure
for inquiry
(Crippen & Archambault,
2012)
Platform on
which
scaffolding
takes place
(Alfieri et al., 2011)
TECHNOLOGY
Discussion
• Convergence of technology,
pedagogy and content –
TPACK (Mishra & Koehler,
2006)
• Leveraging technology
• Reconsider the “innovation”

27. Implications
For Practitioners
• All practitioners have some concerns over integrating technology
• Teacher’s concerns over integrating technology cannot be described by their preferred
practice
• Practitioners are not pure-bred pedagogists
• Use ≠ integration: Pedagogy comes first, technology enhances/transforms learning
• Embrace the “role shift” that can occur when technology is integrated effectively
For Educational Leaders
• Teacher’s concerns over integrating technology is real
• Even after years of reported practice, still concerns exist
• Ongoing professional learning and supported integration is a must
• Importance of the impact of the affective domain (values, concerns, beliefs) on teacher
decision making 27

28. Limitations
28
Design • Survey Research: Self-reporting
Methodology
• Medium of Distribution
• Subgrouping Procedure
• Validity and Reliability of the Instrument
(Part 2)
Analysis • Amended SoC Questionnaire Data Analysis
Implications • Unable to Generalize to Population

29. Recommendations
FURTHER STUDY
• Observation studies of integration practices in relation to pedagogical practice
• Depth of inquiry-based pedagogical analysis (Crippen & Archambault, 2012)
• Include items in instrument about available technology
• Consider years of teaching experience, as a variable in relation to best-practices of
technology integration
• Consider practitioners’ technology experience, as a variable to integrating
technology
• How long does it take to master effective technology integration?
• Consider alternative pedagogical practices
29

30. ThankYou
Thesis Committee
• Dr. Steven Mertens
• Dr. Barbara Meyer
30

31. A Comparative Study of the Practitioner’s
Role to IntegrateTechnology within an
Inquiry-Based Learning Environment
Ashley Mayor
School ofTeaching and Learning
Illinois State University
May 2015
31