A Comparison of Self-Reported Educational Technology Integration Proficiencies and Evidence-Based Educational Technology Integration Practices among Select Elementary Language Arts Teachers

Autor/in	Anderson, Monika R.
Titel	A Comparison of Self-Reported Educational Technology Integration Proficiencies and Evidence-Based Educational Technology Integration Practices among Select Elementary Language Arts Teachers
Quelle	(2014), (265 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit Ed.D. Dissertation, Sam Houston State University
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
ISBN	978-1-3210-6655-5
Schlagwörter	Hochschulschrift; Dissertation; Educational Technology; Technology Integration; Elementary School Teachers; Language Arts; Case Studies; Educational Practices; Teacher Surveys; Technology Uses in Education; Program Implementation; Mixed Methods Research; Self Evaluation (Individuals); Texas + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Thesis; Dissertations; Academic thesis; Unterrichtsmedien; Elementary school; Teacher; Teachers; Grundschule; Volksschule; Lehrer; Lehrerin; Lehrende; Sprachkultur; Case study; Fallstudie; Case Study; Bildungspraxis; Technology enhanced learning; Technology aided learning; Technologieunterstütztes Lernen
Abstract	The purpose of this study was to use a variety of techniques and data sources, to describe and to compare the self-reported educational technology integration proficiency levels with the evidence-based educational technology integration practices among select elementary language arts teachers. A collective case study design (Stake, 1995) was used in this study and featured four elementary teachers. To address the quantitative research question, study participants were asked to complete a copy of the TX Teacher STaR Chart survey to determine their levels of progress or proficiencies regarding their abilities to integrate technology across the curriculum. For the qualitative phase, evidence-based data were collected by the researcher through classroom observation visits. Additionally, study participants provided the researcher with archival self-reported lesson plans. Data from the quantitative phase of this study were analyzed using a descriptive research design, and within-case and cross-case analyses were conducted using constant comparison analysis (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), and classical content analysis (Berelson, 1952). For the mixed methods phase, data results obtained from both the quantitative and the qualitative phases of this study were analyzed using the technique of classical content analysis (Berelson, 1952), and employed the use of both within-case and cross-case analyses. Derived from the TX Teacher STaR Chart survey, four focus areas within the key area of Teaching and Learning (i.e., Patterns of Classrooms Use [TL1], Frequency/Design of Instructional Setting Using Digital Content [TL2], Content Area Connections [TL3], and Online Learning [TL6]) were the four meta-themes examined in this study. Teachers were more likely to over-report their progress level than to under-report it on the state's progress monitoring survey instrument. I determined that the different data sources, TX STaR Chart survey, classroom observations, and archival lesson plans, more often revealed contrasting proficiency ratings than comparable proficiency ratings. Findings from this study can be useful in: (a) the planning of professional developments for in-service teachers, (b) the preparation of pre-service teacher education programs, and (c) the implementation of technology use for optimum impact on student learning. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01