You are here:

Integrating Educational Technology into the Secondary Science Teaching

, University of Minnesota, STEM Education Center, United States ; , University of Minnesota, United States

CITE Journal Volume 12, Number 2, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA


The integration of technology in teaching is still challenging for most teachers, even though there has been a historical growth of Internet access and available educational technology tools in schools. Teachers have not incorporated technology into their teaching for various reasons, such as lack of knowledge of technology, time, and support. In this study, three beginning science teachers who successfully achieved technology integration were followed for 3 years to investigate how their beliefs, knowledge, and identity contributed to their uses of technology in their classroom instruction. The findings demonstrate that the participating teachers were all intrinsically motivated to use technology in their teaching and this motivation allowed them to enjoy using technology in their instruction and kept them engaged in technology use. The major findings of the study are displayed in a model, which indicates that the internalization of the technology use comes from reflection and that teachers’ use of technology in classroom instruction is constructed jointly by their technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge; beliefs; identity; and the resources that are available to them. The study has implications for teachers and teacher educators for successful technology integration into science classrooms.


Guzey, S.S. & Roehrig, G.H. (2012). Integrating Educational Technology into the Secondary Science Teaching. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 12(2), 162-183. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 22, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Becker, H.J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning, and computing survey. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51). Retrieved from
  2. Becker, H.J. (2001, April 21). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Researchers Association. Retrieved from the Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations website:
  3. Brickner, D. (1995). The effects of first and second order barriers to change on the degree and nature of computer usage of secondary mathematics teachers: A case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
  4. Dani, D., & Koenig, K. (2008). Technology and reform-based education. Theory into Practice, 47(3), 204-211.
  5. Deci, E. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
  6. Dweck, C.S. (2002). Beliefs that make smart people dumb. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.). Why smart people can be so stupid (pp. 24-41). New Haven. CT: Yale University Press.
  7. Eccles, J., & Wingfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review Psychology, 53, 109-132.
  8. Ertmer, P. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Education Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61.
  9. Ertmer, P. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 41-56.
  10. Ertmer, P., Paul, A., Lane, M., Ross, E., & Woods, D. (1999). Examining teachers’ beliefs about the role of technology in the elementary classrooms. Journal of Research in Computing in Education, 32(1), 54-71.
  11. Ford, M. (1992). Motivating humans: Goals, emotions, and personal agency beliefs. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publication.
  12. Guzey, S.S., & Roehrig, G.H. (2009). Teaching science with technology: Case studies of science teachers’ development of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). Retrieved from
  13. Hadley, M., & Sheingold, K. (1993). Commonalities and distinctive patterns in teachers’ integration of computers. American Journal of Education, 101, 261-315.
  14. Honey, M., & Moeller, B. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs and technology integration: Different values, different understandings (Technical Report No 6). New York, NY: Center for Technology in Education.
  15. Kagan, D. (1992). Implication of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 65-90.
  16. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In The AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators, (pp. 3-31). New York, NY: Routledge.
  17. Lee, H.-S., Linn, M.C., Varma, K., & Liu, O.L. (2010). How does technology-enhanced inquiry science units impact classroom learning? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(1), 71–90.
  18. Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology uses and student achievement: A longitudinal study. Computers and Education, 49, 284-296.
  19. Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-based classrooms: A developmental view. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(2), 157-181.
  20. Luft, J. (2009). Beginning secondary science teachers in different induction programmes: The first year of teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 31(17), 2355-2384.
  21. Luft, J., & Roehrig, G.H. (2007). Capturing science teachers’ epistemological beliefs: The development of the teacher beliefs interview. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 38-63.
  22. Lumpe, A., & Chambers, E. (2001). Assessing teachers’ context beliefs about technology utilization. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 93-107.
  23. McCrory, R. (2008). Science, technology, and teaching: The topic-specific challenges of TPCK in science. In The AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 193-206). New York NY: Routledge.
  24. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  25. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  26. National Education Association. (2008). Access, adequacy, and equity in education technology: Results of a survey of America’s teachers and support professionals on technology in public schools and classrooms. Retrieved from the Edutopia website:,Adequacy,andEquityinEdTech.pdf
  27. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  28. Nespor, J. (1987) The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328.
  29. Niess, M.L. (2005) Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509-523.
  30. Pajares, M.F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
  31. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), The handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed.; pp. 102-119). New York,
  32. Russell, D.W., Lucas, K.B., & McRobbie, C.J. (2003). The role of the microcomputerbased laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in kinematics. Research in Science Education, 33(2), 217-243.
  33. Sandholtz, J., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D.C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  34. Schroeder, C., Scott, T., Tolson, H., Huang, T., & Lee, Y. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 1436-1460.
  35. Sheingold, K., & Hadley, M. (1990). Accomplished teachers: Integrating computers into classroom practice. New York, NY: Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street College of Education.
  36. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
  37. Songer, N.B. (2007). Digital resources versus cognitive tools: A discussion of learning science with technology. In S.K. Abell& N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 471-493). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  38. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousands Oak, CA: Sage Publications.
  39. U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment. (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection. Retrieved from the Princeton University website:
  40. U.S. Department of Education. (2003) Federal funding for educational technology and how it is used in the classroom: A summary of findings from the integrated studies of educational technology. Retrieved from
  41. VanLehn, K., Graesser, A.C., Jackson, G.T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C.P. (2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science, 30, 3-62.
  42. Wallace, C., & Kang, N-H. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers’ beliefs about inquiry: An examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(9), 936-960.
  43. Windshitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 165-205.
  44. Yerrick, R., & Hoving, T. (1999). Obstacles confronting technology initiatives as seen through the experience of science teachers: A comparative study of science teachers’ beliefs, planning, and practice. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(4), 291307.
  45. Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482-515.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Using Multiple Digital Technologies in an Online MS Program to Develop TPACK

    Henry Gillow-Wiles & Margaret Niess, Oregon State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (Mar 25, 2013) pp. 3892–3899

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact