The study examined the role student, teacher/classroom, and school characteristics play on the “digital divide” in access and utilization of various technology tools among elementary school students. Survey data was collected from 1,027 fourth- and fifth-grade students in 48 classrooms in northeastern Ohio. A two-level hierarchical linear model (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002) was used to examine the extent to which teacher/classroom, school, and home variables can predict the average classroom usage of specific technology tools. Data analysis in this study by specific type of computer tools showed that, in general, students tend to use technology tools for individual/personal practices rather than for instructional activities. Students’ usage of word processing, interactive, and productivity tools was significantly lower in schools located in urban and rural areas than those in suburban communities. The results also indicated that school location, school technological support, and teachers’ beliefs about technology were significant predictors of the classroom student usage-gap of productivity tools between those who have and those who do not have access to computers at home. Teachers’ level of experience was also found to relate significantly to the students’ usage of computer tools.
Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education has a whole new look, and article URLs have changed. We have found 2 articles that may match the URL you entered or followed:
Many teacher educators lack the skills necessary to model effective technology use in their university courses. An effective faculty development program is critical in addressing this concern. This project focused on the development and implementation of a professional development program to assist faculty members in the integration of technology into courses taken by teacher education students. The article describes the evolution of this program over a 3-year period. During the first year, seven ways were identified to enhance the professional development experience including depth, hands-on practice, project-based approach, modeling, examples, ongoing assessment, and timesavers. These ideas were implemented in the second and third years. The workshop format was found to be an effective professional development tool. However, some faculty members required support beyond the workshops. The third year placed emphasis on addressing the individual needs of faculty members and providing expanded professional development opportunities such as mentoring and professional sharing. As a result of the professional development program, faculty members designed course syllabi that demonstrated technology use, integrated technology into their courses, and became better prepared to meet the challenge of integrating technology to enhance student learning.