Shawn Lees-Carr

EDUC 521: Telecommunications

Assignment: Journal Review

APA-style Citation:

Chao-Hsiu Chen. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? The Journal of Education Research. 102 (1), 65-75. Retrieved from ProQuest database (1554910581).

Article Description/Summary: The researcher investigated the attitudes teachers held about lesson delivery and incorporating technology in their instruction to determine if teachers were actually practicing what they believed. According to Judson (2006) and other researchers, as cited in Chao-Hsiu (2008), there may be a definite disconnect between the educational philosophies held by teachers and the actual delivery of information. To explore this mismatch, the researcher studied the attitudes, perceptions and actual lessons of 12 Taiwanese public high school teachers in Taipei. The researcher employed many tools to gather his information, including personal structured interviews, observations and questionnaires.

Chao-Hsiu (2008) found inconsistencies between the teachers’ philosophies on how to best educate students and the benefits of technology, and what was actually happening in the classroom. All teachers studied subscribed to a constructivism approach to education in which students “construct” their own knowledge through experiences and interactions, while drawing from their prior knowledge. Instructors facilitate by organizing learning activities designed to promote student problem-solving and inquiry (Chao-Hsiu, 2008). Technology has been found to support a constructivist approach, and the teachers agreed that technology was an important tool to help develop these skills (Jonassen, Howland, Moore, & Merra, 2003; Lowyck & Elen, 2004, as cited in Chao-Hsiu, 2008).

However, teachers were not using technology to promote student learning, even though they all agreed that it was a very valuable teaching tool (Chao-Hsiu, 2008). Instead, teachers used more traditional methods, including textbook work and lecturing. Chao-Hsiu (2008) identified several general categories of reasons why teachers were not using technology. External variables included not enough technology software and hardware, not enough time for planning and not enough administrative support. Because of national testing goals, instructors felt personally responsible for their students’ scores. They worried about repercussions from administration and families if students did not score well.

Teacher misperception or lack of knowledge of ways to effectively use technology also contributed to an absence of technology in classroom instruction. Finally, Chao-Hsiu (2008) found that other beliefs held by teachers may override or be more important than incorporating technology. For example, teachers felt pressure to cover the massive curriculum or that students would not actually use the technology for what was planned. Overall, teachers feared that a waste of time would occur (Chao-Hsiu, 2008).

Interpretation/Reaction: Despite this study being conducted in Taiwan, many of the same variables seems to impact the use of technology in American schools. It is common to hear among teachers that there is not enough time to cover the required content and that mandatory testing as a result of No Child Left Behind has placed tremendous pressure on educators to produce quantifiable data. Like in Taiwan, the government encourages teachers to use the latest tools and provide engaging, authentic learning activities, however, it seems many educators are overwhelmed with exhausting requirements associated with student accountability. Some educators revert back to instructional strategies they feel most comfortable with and that they believe may produce the quickest gains. These instructional strategies often offer the most teacher-control and center around direct, explicit instruction, just as Chao-Hsui (2008) found in Taiwan.

Another interesting issue identified by in the study is also a concern in the United States. Little training (and reassurance) is given to show teachers how to best effectively incorporate technology. While many teachers may know about technology and its latest developments, implementation remains difficult. Many staff developments seem to focus on introducing techniques and explaining how they are supposed to work. Staff agree, like they do in Chao-Hsiu’s study (2008), that technology is important but questions remain about balance, time and meaningful use. According to Bitner &Bittner (2002) as cited in (Chao-Hsiu, 2008, p.74), “Feasible examples of effective technology integration should be readily available” to help guide productive use and show teachers how technology can easily and effectively be integrated without losing control of the class or content.

What would be interesting is to have the government, board of education or organization mandating achievement levels also provide specific, authentic “doable” activities and methods utilizing technology instead providing vague learning objectives. This may not only provide realistic examples for staff but also the reassurance to try. Also, an investment needs to be made in increasing the number and quality of computers, networks, software licenses, etc. Worries such as broken equipment, equipment shortages, outdated software and fragile servers, etc. continue to plague educators. Yes, technology holds remarkable potential, many believe in it, and students have long ago embraced it. Like many things in education, however, the realty in the classroom rarely measures up to the ideal.