Investigating the Relationship between Interactive Technologies and Student Engagement and Achievement in the Classroom
by Ashley M. Coffman
Needs Assessment
Recent student passing rates on math TAKS tests, coupled with concerns about lack of engagement expressed by both teachers and students, indicated that there was a need for an intervention that prior research suggested would be successful.
Passing rates on the 2009-2010 TAKS math test for intermediate and middle school levels (grades 5-8) revealed a need for improvement. The chart below illustrates the overall passing rate for these grades, as well as the achievement gap between the All Students group and the following student groups: African-American, Hispanic, Economically Disadvantaged, Special Education, LEP, and At-Risk.
Grade | All Students | White | African- American | Hispanic | Econ. Disadv. | Special Ed | LEP | At-Risk |
5 | 88% | 92% | 79% | 85% | 80% | 58% | 67% | 70% |
6 | 87% | 91% | 83% | 82% | 81% | 59% | 67% | 64% |
7 | 83% | 88% | 74% | 81% | 76% | 54% | 71% | 64% |
8 | 84% | 90% | 74% | 81% | 78% | 51% | 68% | 66% |
During the needs assessment process, interviews with teachers and students indicated a need for greater student engagement in the classroom. A content analysis of these interviews revealed that the word “boring” was repeated by students frequently. Another indication of the need to promote greater student engagement was repeated mention during teacher interviews about the need to “get students to pay attention.” Similar phrases were mentioned eight times during the pre-study teacher interviews.
Goals and Vision
The overall vision of the action research project is to improve student performance in math by improving student engagement during classroom instruction. The goals related to this vision include:
1. Students will find the content and instruction more interesting.
2. Students will participate with greater regularity and intensity in classroom instruction.
3. Students will master targeted objectives more quickly and to a greater depth.
A variety of strategies were used to determine the extent to which the vision of the project had been realized and measureable objectives had been achieved, including:
- Pretest and posttest assessments to determine student growth in mastery of the knowledge and skills taught during the targeted unit of study. After using the pretest scores to control for prior knowledge, the expected result was that students in the experimental groups (classes that had used the interactive technologies) would achieve higher scores on the posttest.
- Observable student engagement was also used to measure. The investigator observed classroom instruction and assessed the degree to which students were engaged using the Texas Professional Development and Appraisal System (PDAS) framework for teacher observations. The percentage of students actively participating in instructional strategies was recorded at five-minute intervals throughout the 30-minute observation period. The expected result was that a higher average percentage of students would be actively participating in instructional strategies in the experimental sections of the class.
- A student survey was used to collect student feedback regarding their own experiences during the study. Questions in Likert format were used to determine students’ level of interest and engagement in both the control and experimental sections of the class. The expected result was that students in the experimental groups would report higher interest and levels of engagement in their classes.
- Focus groups were used to solicit qualitative feedback from students on the effect of interactive technology on their learning. The expected result was that students who were in the experimental group would share comments that help to explain the quantitative survey results.
- Teacher surveys and interviews were also used to subjectively assess the level of student engagement and mastery of content in the treatment group compared to the control group.
Secondary goals of this study include the justification of “Extreme Makeover: High Tech Edition”, an $8.5 million district implementation of interactive technologies, including interactive whiteboards and slates, in all instructional classrooms, and an endorsement for future spending to expand interactive whiteboards to small-group instruction settings and/or equip classrooms with student response systems.
Review of the Literature and Action Research Strategy
The literature review began with an in-depth investigation of student disengagement in today’s classrooms and exploring ideas on how to resolve this issue that plagues classrooms all across the nation. First of all, I found that students benefit greatly from “democratic classrooms that honor their opinions” (Bean, 1997) and those type of classrooms “tend to have few discipline problems, more civic involvement, higher student engagement, and higher achievement” (Black, 2005, p. 39). Teachers must give students a voice in the classroom, and question students in a way that provokes their natural curiosity (High & Andrews, 2009). Furthermore, today’s students are also “accustomed to lightning fast interactions and visually engaging with the world around them” (Burkett, 2011), and educators must also plan and design instruction to cater to this need.
Based on these findings, the use of student response systems seemed to an effective strategy to increase student engagement and achievement for multiple reasons. First, they allow each student to have a voice in the classroom and eliminate intimidation factors. Shy students are no longer embarrassed to participate in class discussions, and students do not fear being singled out or ridiculed if they answer a question incorrectly. Secondly, student response systems facilitate engagement and allow “lightning fast interactions” with others (Burkett, 2011). This promotes collaboration and teamwork, and makes students active participants in the learning process. Last of all, student response system allow teachers to continually assess students’ understanding of concepts, and modify instruction instantly to improve comprehension.
Because interactive technologies are a relatively new intervention, a limited number of scientific studies have been conducted to assess their impact on teaching. The only study I discovered in the lit review was Marzano’s ActivClassroom study. His research suggests that use of student response systems is associated with higher levels of student engagement and achievement (State Educational Technology Directors Association, 2009). My action research project was closely modeled after Marzano’s study, but with a focus on mathematics.
Another element of the action research project adapted from findings in the lit review was the classroom observation report used to evaluate the level of student engagement. Engagement was measured based on the following characteristics (Jones, 2009):
· Positive body language
· Consistent focus
· Verbal participation
· Student confidence
· Fun and excitement
Articulating the Vision
Articulating the vision was a top-down process, starting with district-level administrators. To initiate the study, I first had to effectively articulate the vision of my action research project to the Assistant Superintendent of Technology Development and the Secondary Math Coordinator, and get both on board with the study. To do this, I prepared a presentation that clearly communicated the needs, goals, and vision of the study, and met with them personally to deliver the presentation. Once both approved the study, we worked together to adapt Marzano’s study to the math classroom and select campuses for the study. After the campuses were selected, I then contacted each campus principal via email to provide an overview of the study, detailing the need, vision, and process, and asked them to recommend math teachers for the study.
To recruit enthusiastic participants, I had to make sure I clearly communicated the vision and purpose of the study to them as well. I contacted them via email with an in-depth overview of the study, including what exactly will be required from them. At our first training, I took the first 15 minutes to reiterate the vision for the study. I felt it was very important to make sure they have a clear understanding of the study’s purpose.
Finally, the vision was articulated to students and parents through a letter sent home. An overview of the study will also be published on the district Educational Technology website, as well as progress updates and findings. This will allow all teachers, administrators, students, teachers, and community members to learn more about the study.
Managing the Organization
Once the design of the study was finalized, its successful implementation had to be choreographed among many stakeholders, including myself, the Secondary Math Coordinator, the Assistant Superintendent of Technology Development, out-of-district trainers, and the participating teachers. First of all, I worked with the Assistant Superintendent to determine what costs are associated with the study and set a project budget. This budget included sub costs for training teachers and designated time to plan units of study. Per his advice, I also set aside funds to purchase additional interactive slates as incentives for teacher participants.
Time limitations emerged as the primary concern. With busy schedules, it was a challenge to coordinate a time for training, planning, and conducting the study. Accordingly, I worked with the principals and the teachers to secure substitutes so that their classes would be covered while they participated in training and planned the units of study that would serve as the context for the study. Coincidentally, the math coordinator had already scheduled this training with a Promethean trainer for another project, and my study participants were able to attend the training free of charge. I also scheduled another half day work session for the teachers to design their unit of study and develop lesson materials. I felt that giving teachers this time to prepare was essential to the success of the study.
As part of the district-wide “Extreme Makeover: High Tech Edition” project, all instructional classrooms were already equipped with mounted projectors, interactive whiteboards or slates, and document cameras. Two of the teachers already had access to a set of student response systems to use for the study. However, I had to procure two additional sets of ActivExpressions for the other teachers to use. Fortunately, the Promethean representative for our district loaned us these two sets for the entire duration of the study.
The teachers were given specific directions on conducting the study. Their responsibilities included:
· Designing 2-week unit of study and developing materials
· Sending letter home to parents about the study
· Administering pretest and posttest to students; recording test results
· Facilitating online student survey
· Completing teacher survey
· Participating in interview
I communicated with the teachers on a weekly basis to check their progress, offer assistance with conducting the study, and troubleshoot technology problems.
Student confidentiality and safety were upheld at all times during the study. Teachers de-identified all test scores before submission, removing name and student ID number. In addition, surveys were completed anonymously online.
Managing Operations
The strategy used to lead the operations of the project was to provide teachers with the motivation, skills, and tools necessary to successfully participate in the project. The first step was to conduct a needs assessment to determine areas in which student performance needed to improve. The targeted subject area was determined to be math. Interviews with students and teachers were scheduled with math teachers at the intermediate and middle school levels in order to identify teacher and student perceptions of the reasons that students had struggled traditionally in math classes.
Approval from the district administration and from campus leadership was required initially, and the first step of the project was to secure this. I also made sure that the study fully complied with board policy for research projects, which stipulates that no personally identifiable information may be shared with people who do not have a legitimate educational interest in having access to that information.
The principals involved voiced concerns about the costs of the project and having the teachers off-campus. The conflict was resolved by securing funds from the Technology Department to pay the substitutes. Providing equipment to the campus also served to reduce concerns and head-off potential conflict; as an added bonus, I was given permission by the Assistant Superintendent to provide interactive slates as incentives to the teachers for use in their classrooms.
Another high priority was making sure that I had firm commitments from teachers to participate in the project. During our early meetings, I explained the project and shared the implications of the results for them and their students. Initial feedback indicated high interest tempered by concern about not having enough time to plan the interventions and participate in training so that the project would be worthwhile. Using group process skills, I worked with the teachers to identify steps that we could take to reduce their stress and secure their commitment to participate.
Good communication skills were required to schedule the training and ensure that all of the teachers brought appropriate curriculum guides, texts, and electronic files to create their new units of study during the time allotted. Frequent email reminders leading up to the session served this purpose. Evaluations administered following the planning and training sessions indicated that teachers felt prepared to use the new equipment, teach the units of study, and administer the pretest and posttest.
Community Interest and Needs
The research project serves the needs of students with special and exceptional needs and students of diverse backgrounds by highlighting achievement gaps and employing promising, cutting-edge intervention strategies designed to address them.
The need for improvement in student achievement in math and science was identified using a variety of methods. The math TAKS passing rates were not consistent with performance on other subject area tests such as reading and writing. In addition, an analysis of TAKS scores indicated that achievement gaps existed between the All Students group and the Hispanic, African-American, Economically Disadvantaged, Special Education, LEP, and At-Risk student groups. Interviews were used to assess student and teacher perceptions of the causes of limited student success on the TAKS in targeted content areas.
The high cost of the interactive technologies deployed as part of this study means that schools that serve more high-income families may be among the first to raise the funds necessary to deploy them. The high cost of these tools means that schools also share few units among many classrooms. Time allocated for students to use these tools may be based on the teacher’s interest or ability to use them rather than students’ needs. In our district, there has been a commitment to deploy interactive technologies equitably across the district without regard to the fundraising ability of schools. Within the past 18 months, over $8.5 million has been allocated by the district on interactive technologies. The “Extreme Makeover: High Tech Edition” project in our district deployed an interactive white board (elementary) or interactive slate (secondary), as well as a document camera and LCD projector, to all classrooms that serve all groups of 22 or more students.
With the initial wave of installations nearly complete, discussions have been initiated about the best use for remaining funds, which is roughly $1.5 million. Options include increasing the number of installations of interactive technologies to include small group instructional settings such as ELL and Special Education classrooms. Another plan under consideration is whether to purchase more ActivExpression student response systems for deployment throughout the district. A third option is to return the remaining funds to the district’s reserves or allocate them to another project that achieves more promising results.
Implementation of the Vision
What is the action research topic? | How do interactive slates and student response systems impact student engagement and student achievement in the classroom? |
Where is the research taking place? | At four intermediate/middle school campuses in the district, including: · Asa Low Intermediate School · Cross Timbers Intermediate School · Mary Orr Intermediate School · T.A. Howard Middle School |
When is the research taking place? | March 2011 – June 2011 |
Who is involved in the research? | · Ashley Coffman (myself) · Lee Anne Dozier (8th Grade Math Teacher, T.A. Howard) and students · Blake Bowman (5th Grade Math Teacher, Mary Orr) and students · Carissa Spatz (6th Grade Math Teacher, Asa Low) and students · Laura Thompson (5th Grade Math Teacher, Cross Timbers) and students · Mike Bauer, Promethean Trainer |
How will data be collected? | · Pre- and post-assessments (traditional classroom vs. ActivClassroom) · Observations · Student surveys · Teacher surveys · Teacher interviews |
What timelines have been established? | · February 2011 – finalize resources (financial, human, training, equipment) for study · March 2011 – ActivExpressions ½ day training for participants (from Promethean) · April 2011 – conduct pre-surveys for teachers; ½ day preparation time for participating teachers to plan unit-of-study · May 2011 – conduct research (including pre-assessment and post-assessments, observations); conduct post-surveys (student and teacher) · August 2011 – conduct teacher interviews; analyze data · September 2011 – prepare summary report and present to Technology Leadership team |
Steward the Vision
The teachers participating in the survey were excited to have the opportunity to test out the ActivExpressions in their classroom for an extended period of time, and this served as their initial motivation for participating in the study. The Assistant Superintendent of Technology Development also budgeted some money for the research project to purchase each of the teachers an extra ActivSlate for their classroom. This was an unanticipated bonus for the teachers, and it provided incentive for the teachers to adhere to the research guidelines and complete all elements of the action research project by the established deadlines.
Another strategy utilized to uphold a shared commitment to the project was respect of time. Sub funds were budgeted so that each teacher had time outside of their normal duties to attend training on the ActivExpressions student response systems and prepare for their two-week unit of study using the equipment and software. Without this given time, the teachers would not have been as motivated or committed to the project.
Communication was also a key strategy employed to monitor, evaluate, and revise the action research plan. I communicated with the participants on a weekly basis to check their progress, answer their questions, and offer my assistance. I also visited the campuses to help with set up and troubleshoot technology issues. Other strategies used to monitor, evaluate, and revise the plan include use of a calendar, use of task reminders (in Outlook), and meetings with my site supervisor.
Promote Community Involvement in the Vision
The action research project has not included any community involvement thus far. However, since the $8.5 million Extreme Makeover: High Tech Edition district initiative was funded by the district’s fund balance and future spending will be funded from the same source, I think it is important to communicate the vision to community members and involve them in promoting the vision. Ideas to communicate the vision include posting the results of the action research project on the Mansfield ISD Tech Notes blog, where staff and community members can post comments, as well as on the Mansfield ISD website. In addition, I can survey the parents of students who have the student response systems and interactive whiteboards/slates in their classroom to see what impact they believe the technology has had on their child’s education and overall attitude toward learning.
Managing Resources
Fortunately, the action research project did not require a significant amount of financial resources to conduct. Costs associated with the study were limited to sub expenses and ActivSlates used as incentives for the participants, which were both funded from the Technology budget. Required technology equipment such as mounted projectors, ActivSlates, and ActivExpression student response systems were already in place at the campus or loaned to us from Promethean.
The only other resources for this project included training facilities, human resources, and time. Training was provided in-district by myself and a Promethean trainer, both free of charge. Time and training labs were scheduled equitably with other district training, including ActivAcademy and curriculum workshops, using Eduphoria software already implemented in the district. Human resources were managed through constant communication, including email and a shared calendar in Outlook which allowed all participants to effectively schedule meetings and observations. Teachers were compensated for their time invested in the study with an extra ActivSlate for their classroom.
Mobilize Community Resources
School district resources, including computers, LCD projectors, document cameras, and ActivSlates were utilized to support the vision of the action research project. Campus resources, including the ActivExpressions student response systems, were used at two of the campuses, while Promethean provided the other two sets of ActivExpressions to use during the project free of charge. The MISD Technology Department also purchased ActivSlates as an incentive for teachers to participate in the study.
Promote Positive School Culture
I predict that the results of the study will show a positive correlation between the use of interactive technologies in the classroom and student engagement, and also a positive relationship between the use of interactive technologies and student achievement. If these predictions holds true, funding will hopefully be approved to equip additional classrooms and/or departments across the district with ActivExpressions student response systems, thus engaging more students in the learning process. I also believe that the results of the study, if they turn out as predicted, will impact teachers’ attitude about technology and consequently change their instructional and assessment strategies to incorporate the interactive technologies. In short, I am confident that the results of my study will ultimately promote a positive school culture by enhancing both instruction and student learning.
Provide an Effective Instructional Program
Tests, surveys, and focus groups were used throughout the needs assessment process in order to determine how to structure the intervention most effectively and provide a baseline for subsequent analysis. Data for these analyses has been collected, and a table that highlights salient findings is being developed. Once the data is compiled and analyzed, conclusions will be drawn and recommendations will be made to district leaders. If the data shows a positive correlation between interactive technologies and student engagement/achievement, the results will be used to endorse additional funding for interactive technologies in small group instructional settings, such as Special Education and ELL classrooms, as well as for the purchase of student response systems in all instructional classrooms.
Influencing the Larger Context
First of all, per the request of my site supervisor, I will present the results of my action research to the district’s Technology Leadership team. The results, if they depict a positive impact on student engagement and achievement, will be used to endorse a request for funds to add interactive technologies in small-group settings (Special Education, ELL) and purchase additional sets of ActivExpressions in the district. I would also like to present the research at a district PDC (Principals, Directors, and Coordinators) meeting to encourage principals and departments to spend campus funds on ActivExpressions.
Furthermore, I plan to write an article about my findings and post it on our Educational Technology website so I can share the results with all teachers, campus administrators, and district administrators in the district. I also plan to submit the article to Tech & Learning, an educational journal for technology leaders, for online and print publication. In addition, I will submit my research results to Promethean as a case study to be published on their website.
Finally, I will also share my action research project results with teachers, instructional
technologists, and administrators at local and state conferences, including the Area 10-11 Technology Conference, TCEA (Texas Computer Education Agency) conference, and Promethean’s ActivAdministrators conference. My presentation will include an overview of the process used to collect data and also a summary of the results.
Comprehensive Professional Growth Plan
To effectively increase student engagement and achievement with interactive technologies, professional development must be provided to teachers so they can develop strategies to optimize the “interactivity” of the technology in their instruction. Currently, the Educational Technology department is offering ActivAcademy workshops where teachers can learn tactics and tips for creating interactive flipcharts. These workshops will continue throughout the next school year, and teachers will be encouraged to attend as many as possible. As more and more sets of ActivExpressions are purchased, it will also be necessary to add workshops to train on these student response systems. In addition, I think it is important to give teachers a checklist of skills so they can evaluate their current knowledge level and track their development.
Key Words, Phrases and Terms
Interactive technologies, Promethean, ActivClassroom, ActivExpressions, ActivSlate, ActivBoard, student response system, student engagement, student achievement, interactive technology, teaching with technology, educational technology, classroom technology
Bibliography
Beane, J.A. (1997) Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Black, S. (2005). Listening to Students. American School Board Journal, 192(11), 39-41.
Burkett, W. (2011, January 14). Using technology to engage students in the classroom. Retrieved July 31, 2011, from Best of UC: http://bestinuc.com/using-technology-to-engage-students-in-the-classroom/
Jones, R. D. (2009). Student Engagement Teacher Handbook. Rexford: http://bestinuc.com/using-technology-to-engage-students-in-the-classroom/.
State Educational Technology Directors Association. (2009) Renowned Education Researcher, Robert Marzano, Touts the Potential of Technology to Magnify Good Teaching Practices, Student Engagement and Teacher Creativity. Retrieved November 28, 2010, from Marketwire: http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Renowned-Education-Researcher-Robert-Marzano-Touts-Potential-Technology-Magnify-Good-1172856.htmI
No comments:
Post a Comment