You are here:

An Investigation of the Impact of Digital Fabrication Projects on Pre-Service Teachers’ Attitudes and Skills
PROCEEDINGS

, , , , , University of North Texas, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Austin, Texas, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-92-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This study looks at the effect of content-specific, technology-rich learning activities on EC-8 preservice teachers’ competencies and skills, as well as their attitudes toward science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). The study employed a quantitative design involving participants in two sections of a required technology integration class which served as part of their teacher preparation sequence. Data were collected using the STEM Semantic Survey, Technology Proficiency Self-Assessment questionnaire, and Stages of Adoption of Technology in Education questionnaire at the beginning and end of the Fall 2011 semester. The findings provide evidence of changes in attitudes and skills of the preservice educators from the beginning to the end of the course. A specific focus is on the emerging relationships between STEM dispositions and technology integration competencies, from the beginning to the end of the course. Applications of these findings and directions for future studies are discussed.

Citation

Alexander, C., Mayes, G., Hopper, S., Thiruvadi, S. & Knezek, G. (2012). An Investigation of the Impact of Digital Fabrication Projects on Pre-Service Teachers’ Attitudes and Skills. In P. Resta (Ed.), Proceedings of SITE 2012--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1025-1032). Austin, Texas, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 6, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Ackerson, V.L., Cullen, T.A., & Hanson, D.L. (2009). Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1090-1113.
  2. Alexander, C. (2011). The Value of Experience: The Influence of Technology-Based STEM Learning Activities on Preservice Teacher Attitudes Toward Science, Technology, Engineering and Math. In M. Koehler& P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 37893795).
  3. Chen, C.H. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? Journal of Educational Research, 102(1), 65–75.
  4. Christensen, R. (1997). Effect of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and their students. Doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas. [Online]. Available: http://courseweb.tac.unt.edu/rhondac. Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 411-433.
  5. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (1999). Stages of adoption for technology in education. Computers in New Zealand Schools, 11(3), 25-29.
  6. Christensen, R. & Knezek, G. (2000). Advancement of Student Technology Integration Skills through University Pre-service Coursework. In D. Willis et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2000 (pp. 1505-1510). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  7. Christensen, R. & Knezek, G. (2002). Advancing Teachers Through Stages of Adoption of Technology in the Classroom. In D. Willis et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2002 (pp. 1983-1987). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  8. Christensen, R. & Knezek, G. (2007). Pathways for preparing tomorrow's teachers to infuse technology. Computers in the Schools, 23(3-4), 1-21.
  9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
  10. Cohen, J.D., Smolkin, L., & Bull, G. (2011). Editorial: Transmedia publishing. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 11(3), 237-242.
  11. Cox, C. & Carpenter, J. (1989). Improving attitudes toward teaching science and reducing science anxiety through increasing confidence in science ability in inservice elementary school teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 1(2), 14-34.
  12. Crowe, A.R. (2004). Teaching by example: Integrating technology into social studies education courses. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 20(4), 159-165.
  13. Darling-Hammond, L., & Ball, D.L. (1998). Teaching for high standards: What policymakers need to know and be able to do (CPRE Joint Report Series, JRE-04). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education and the National Commission on Teaching& America’s Future.
  14. Davis, N., Preston, C., & Sahin, I. (2009). ICT teacher training: Evidence for multilevel evaluation from a national initiative. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 135–148.
  15. Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.
  16. Hernandez-Ramos, P. (2005). If not here, where? Understanding teachers’ use of technology in Silicon Valley schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(1), 39–64.
  17. Hill, H.C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D.L. (2005). Effects of Teachers' Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching on Student Achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371-406.
  18. Jimoyiannisa, A., & Komisb, V. (2007). Examining teachers’ beliefs about ICT in education: Implications of a teacher preparation programme. Teacher Development, 11(2), 149–173.
  19. Kadel, R. (2005). How teacher attitudes affect technology integration. Learning& Leading with Technology, 32(5), 34-35.
  20. Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2000). Refining best teaching practices for technology integration: KIDS project findings for 1999-2000. Denton, TX: University of North Texas.
  21. Knezek, G., Christensen, R. (2002). Impact of new information technologies on teachers and students. Education and Information Technologies 7(4), 369–376.
  22. Knezek, G. & Christensen, R. (2009). Preservice Educator Learning in a Simulated Teaching Environment. In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2009 (pp. 938-946). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  23. Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Tyler-Wood, T., Fisser, P., & Gibson, D. (2012). SimSchool: Research Outcomes from Simulated Classrooms. Full paper presented at the Society for Technology and Teacher Education annual conference in Austin, TX.
  24. Lamb, A. (2011). Reading redefined for a transmedia universe. Learning& Leading with Technology, 39(3), 12-17.
  25. Lim, C.P., & Chai, C.S. (2008). Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of computer mediated classroom lesson. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 807–828.
  26. Lumpe, A.T., & Chambers, E. (2001). Assessing teachers’ context beliefs about technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 93–107.
  27. McGatha, M.B. (2008). Mathematics specialists and coaches: Research and issues from the field. Paper presented at the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Annual Meeting Research Presession. Salt Lake City, UT.(cid:1)
  28. Morrisey, J.T. (1981). An analysis of studies on changing the attitude of elementary student teachers toward science and science teaching. Science Education, 65(2), 157-177.
  29. National Museum of American History. (2011). Paper engineering: Fold, pull, pop and turn. Retrieved on 31 January 2012 from: http://americanhistory.si.edu/exhibitions/exhibition.cfm?key=38 & Exkey=1508.
  30. O’Dwyer, L., Russell, M., & Bebel, D. (2004). Elementary teachers’ use of technology: Characteristics of teachers, schools, and districts associated with technology use. Boston, MA: Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative, Boston College.
  31. Pajares, M.F. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
  32. Paulson, P. (2009, May). Developing quality through improved attitudes toward science and science teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Online. Retrieved from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p35803_index.html
  33. Pell, T. & Jarvis, T. (2001). Developing attitude to science scales for use with children of ages from five to eleven years. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 847-62.
  34. Porter, A. (1989). A curriculum out of balance: The case of elementary school mathematics. Educational Researcher, 18(5), 915.
  35. Reys, B., & Fennell, F. (2003). Who Should Lead Mathematics Instruction at the Elementary School Level? A Case for Mathematics Specialists. Teaching Children Mathematics, 9(5), 277-282.(cid:1)
  36. Ropp, M.M. (1999). Exploring individual characteristics associated with learning to use computers in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 402-424.
  37. Russell, A.L. (1995). Stages in learning new technology: Naive adult email users. Computers in Education, 25(4), 173-178.(cid:1)
  38. Swars, S.L., Daane, C.J., & Giesen, J. (2006). Mathematics Anxiety and Mathematics Teacher Efficacy: What is the Relationship in Elementary Preservice Teachers? School Science and Mathematics, 106(7), 306-315.
  39. Schraw, G., & Olafson, L. (2003). Teachers'epistemological world views and educational practices. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 3(2), 178-235.
  40. Thomas, J.A. & Pederson, J.E. (2003). Reforming elementary science teacher preparation: What about extant teaching beliefs? School Science and Mathematics, 103(7), 319-330.
  41. Thorton, S.J. (1991). Teacher as curricular-instructional gatekeeper in social studies. In J.P. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning (pp. 237-248). New York: MacMillan.
  42. Tilgner, P.I. (1990). Avoiding science in the elementary school. Science Education, 74(4), 421-31.
  43. Tyler-Wood, T., Knezek, G., & Christensen. R. (2010). Instruments for assessing interest in STEM content and careers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 18(2), 341-363.
  44. Ullrich, W. (1999). Depth psychology, critical pedagogy, and initial teacher preparation. Teaching Education, 10(2), 17–33.
  45. Van Braak, J., Tondeur, J., & Valcke, M. (2004). Explaining different types of computer use among primary school teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(4), 407–422.
  46. Vannatta, R.A., & Fordham, N. (2004). Teacher dispositions as predictors of classroom technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 253–271.
  47. Weiss, I. (1987). Report of the 1985-86 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education (NSF Report No. ED292620). Durham, NC: Center for Educational Studies. Retrieved on 18 October 2011 from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED292620.pdf. Wozney, L., Venkatesh, V., & Abrami, P. (2006). Implementing computer technologies: Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 173–207.
  48. Zhao, Y., & Frank, K.A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807–840.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts