LaGrange College - a four year, private liberal arts ...



USING TECHNOLOGY IN A FIFTH GRADE SOCIAL STUDIES CLASSROOM

Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this thesis is my own or was done in collaboration with my Thesis Chair. This thesis does not include proprietary or classified information.

Kimberly Caren Peterson

Certificate of Approval:

_____________________________ _____________________________

Donald R. Livingston, Ed.D. Sharon M. Livingston, Ph.D.

Thesis Co-Chair Thesis Co-Chair

Education Department Education Department

USING TECHNOLOGY IN A FIFTH GRADE CLASSROOM

A thesis submitted

by

Kimberly Caren Peterson

to

LaGrange College

in partial fulfillment of

the requirement for the

degree of

MASTER OF EDUCATION

in

Curriculum and Instruction

Lagrange, Georgia

May 12, 2011

Abstract

This action research study examined how the integration of technology into the social studies curriculum affects student achievement. The study compared two groups of fifth grade students, the treatment group was taught using an instructional plan that incorporated technology, and the control group was instructed by a plan that did not incorporate technology. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected through the use of rubrics, pre and post tests, reflective journals, and student-teacher focus groups. The quantitative data collected from the pre-post tests was calculated using a dependent t-test and an independent t-test. The results showed that students have a higher motivation level when technology is integrated into the social studies curriculum.

Table of Contents

Abstract……………………….……………………………………………………….….iii

Table of Contents……………………….…………………………………………..…….iv

List of Tables..………………………………………………………………………...…..v

Chapter One: Introduction….……………………………………………………………..1

Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………….……1

Significance of the Problem……………………………………………………….2

Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks..………………………………………..2

Focus Questions…………………………………………………………………...4

Overview of Methodology………………………………………………………...4

Human as Researcher……………………………………………………………...5

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature…………………………………………………...6 What does a 21st Century Classroom Look Like?……………….………………..6

Technology Integration and Student Outcomes…………….…………………..10

Teachers’ Attitudes……………………………………………….……………..13

Chapter Three: Methodology…………………………………………………………….17

Research Design………………………………………………………………….17

Setting……………………………………………………………………………17

Subjects and Participants……………………………………………….………..18

Procedures and Data Collection Methods………………………………………..18

Validity, Reliability, Dependability, and Bias..…………………………...…….22

Analysis of Data………………………………………………………………….24

Chapter Four: Results……………………………………………………………………26

Chapter Five: Analysis and Discussion of Results………………………………………39

Analysis………………………………………………………………………….39

Discussion………………………………………………………………………..43

Implications………………………………………………………………………45

Impact on Student Learning……………………………………………………...47

Recommendations for Future Research………………………………………….48

References………………………………………………………………………………..50

Appendixes………………………………………………………………………………52

List of Tables

Tables

Table 3.1 Data Shell………………………………………………………………19

Table 4.1 Dependent t- Test No Treatment...……………………………………..29

Table 4.2 Dependent t- Test Treatment…...………………………………………30

Table 4.3 Independent t- Test Pre-Test…...………………………………………31

Table 4.4 Independent t- Test Post-Test…………………………………………32

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

There is no denying the fact that elementary school teachers live in a world where it is all about math and reading. The pressure from standardized testing and student achievement in math and reading has caused other areas, particularly social studies, to take a back seat. The problem with placing the majority of time and emphasis on math and reading is that students are still being tested in social studies, and teachers are still expected to find the time to teach the social studies curriculum. According to Rabb, a professor of history at Princeton University and a founder and board member of the National Council for History Education, as cited in Manzo’s 2005 article, Social Studies Loosing Out to Reading, Math, “The unintended consequence of No Child Left Behind has been to put history into an even more marginal position” (p. 7). Rabb goes on to say, “It is clear that, with some notable exceptions nationwide, the amount of class time given to history, especially in the first through eighth grades, has been shrinking almost by the month” (as cited in Manzo, 2005, p.17). Elementary school teachers also face the sometimes daunting task of teaching a subject that they have received very little preparation and knowledge in teaching. Oftentimes, teachers in elementary school do not have enough background knowledge on the topics they are teaching, or they do not know what instructional methods are the most effective in teaching social studies. Teachers also face the challenge of motivating students to become interested in topics from the past that are oftentimes irrelevant and insignificant to students who have grown up in a fast paced world where technology is constantly at their fingertips. So, the big question becomes, with little time and resources available, how do we effectively teach elementary school aged children the social studies curriculum, and prepare them for standardized tests and middle and high school social studies courses.

Significance of the Problem

By cutting the time allotted to the teaching of social studies, several issues occur. First, if teachers are no longer being given the proper amount of time to teach social studies in the lower grades, then students are not going to be prepared with the proper amount of background knowledge needed for middle and high school social studies courses. Secondly, by not instilling the basics of geography, citizenship, and the history of the U.S., students are not being prepared to become proactive and knowledgeable citizens of this country. Thirdly, as teachers, we are not relating information from the past to the 21st century learner, and therefore leaving our students with the idea that history is boring and unimportant to their lives. Throughout this study, I hope to discover effective strategies for integrating technology into the social studies curriculum, how student achievement is affected by the integration of technology, and what are teacher’s and student’s perspectives on the effectiveness of incorporating technology into the social studies classroom.

Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks

This thesis is based upon the constructivist theory of education. Constructivists believe that the most effective learning takes place in a classroom where there is, “inquiry teaching methods and students creating concepts built on existing knowledge that are relevant and meaningful” (Powell & Kalina, 2009, p. 241). The constructivist view of building upon prior knowledge is relevant to this study because if students are not given the basic building blocks of social studies in the early years, then they will be ill-equipped for upper-level courses in middle and high school. The foundation must be laid in the early years in order for students to fully understand their responsibilities and civic duties as U.S. citizens.

This thesis also aims to determine the effectiveness of integrating technology into social studies education. The idea of integrating different subjects is closely related to the first tenet of the LaGrange College of Education’s (2008) Conceptual Framework, which is Enthusiastic Engagement in Learning. Under Tenet One, the Knowledge of Curriculum (cluster 1.2), it clearly states that the students of the education department at LaGrange College be able to “relate content areas to other subject areas and see connections in everyday life to make subject matter meaningful.” It is also noted that candidates be able to construct instructional plans that incorporate state, national, and professional standards. It is important to point this out because this thesis seeks to connect social studies and technology in a meaningful way, while also sticking to the standards. (LaGrange Department of Education, 2008, p. 4)

On the national level, Proposition 1: Teachers are Committed to Students and their Learning and Proposition 2: Teachers know the Subjects they Teach and How to Teach Those Subjects, closely relate to this thesis. Proposition one of the NBPTS is important because before a teacher can begin to create lessons that integrate different subjects they must understand that all students come from different backgrounds and learn differently, so activities that meet the needs of all students need to be implemented. Proposition 2 is important because if a teacher does not understand the subject that they are teaching, then how can they relate the subject, much less integrate two subjects effectively in the classroom. The state of Georgia’s Frameworks of Teaching are also important to mention, specifically Domain 1: Content and Curriculum, which is very similar to Proposition 2 of the national standards. Domain 1 of the Georgia Frameworks basically reemphasizes the point that teachers have “a strong knowledge of content areas appropriate for their certification levels.”

Focus Questions

There are many different opinions on the importance of social studies education in elementary school, as well as different views on the best instructional practices to the teaching of social studies in the early years. This study explores the most effective ways of teaching and integrating technology into a fifth grade social studies classroom, how the integration of technology into the social studies classroom effects student achievement, and teacher and student attitudes towards the integration of technology into the social studies curriculum. This study was designed and led by several key questions.

1. What strategies are the most effective for integrating technology into social studies education?

2. How does incorporating technology into the social studies curriculum affect student learning?

3. What are the opinions and attitudes of students, teachers, and administrators towards the integration of technology into the social studies curriculum?

Overview of Methodology

This study was designed to explore what happens to student achievement and motivation when technology becomes the forefront in a social studies classroom. Participants in the study included students, teachers, and administrators from one Title I elementary school in Newnan, Georgia. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected for the study. Quantitative data was collected through pre and post-test assessments aligned with the 5th grade Georgia Performance Standards for social studies. Qualitative data was collected using a two week instructional plan reviewed by a veteran colleague, focus groups discussions with 5th grade students, and teachers from a variety of different grade levels, and reflective journaling.

Human as the Researcher

At the time of this study, I was a second year, 5th grade social studies and language arts teacher at a Title 1 elementary school. My teaching experience in the classroom has been short, but full of discovery, and the realization that there is always something new to learn as a person and a teacher. This is why it was easy for me to see an area of weakness in my classroom and begin a journey on how to improve this weakness. The motivating factor behind completing this study came after finishing my first year of teaching, when I quickly realized I teach a population of students who eat, sleep, and breathe technology. The students in my classroom last year, and this year are dominated by a world of cell phones, text messaging, facebook, video games, and ipods. Oftentimes I have found it difficult to capture my children’s minds and get them enthusiastic about learning, particularly in the area of history. Social studies is already a difficult subject to teach at my school because of the time restraints placed on teaching time, and then when you throw in the fact that the majority of 5th grade students are uninterested in learning about topics from the past, it becomes even more difficult. That being said, I chose to complete this study to discover if incorporating technology into the social studies curriculum would have a positive effect in motivating 5th grade students in the area of social studies education

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

With a growing emphasis being placed on the importance of integrating technology into the classrooms, many teachers are struggling to find the best integration techniques, the proper materials, and the time to learn how to use new materials. As teachers, we are now expected to turn our classrooms into a center where the 21st century learner can grow. This literature review will provide a description of effective strategies for integrating technology into the social studies curriculum, how incorporating technology into the classroom effects student learning, and what are the teachers and students attitudes towards the use of technology in a social studies classroom.

What does a 21st century social studies classroom look like?

When you begin to think about incorporating technology into social studies, it is interesting to note that social studies has been affected by the impact of technology more than any other subject, According to Ayas’ (2006) online journal article, An Examination of the Relationship between the Integration of Technology into Social Studies and Constructivist Pedogogies, “ researchers report that social studies educators are somewhat less likely to integrate technology into the curriculum than instructors in other disciplines, such as mathematics and science education” ( p.1). Instead of incorporating technology into the social studies classrooms, many social studies teachers are more comfortable teaching in the traditional classroom where students are in a passive learning environment and primarily learning through lectures, direct instruction, textbooks, and other expository materials, which tends to result with students becoming unmotivated and disengaged (Ayas, 2006).

With so many different forms of technology available to be used and integrated into the classroom, how can teachers know which strategies are the most effective? Some of the latest and hottest trends being used to integrate technology into the social studies curriculum are virtual or online field trips, WebQuests, educational games online, computer simulation programs, and the digital poster website, Glogster.

Virtual and online field trips are one of the best ways to bring social studies topics to life in the classroom. This tool is especially attractive to use in the classroom because of the growing number of budget cuts in schools that have prevented many school systems from participating in field trips. In fact, in Wilson, Rice, and Bagley’s article, Virtual Field Trips and Newsrooms: Integrating Technology into the Classroom, the authors had this to say about the benefits of virtual field trips, “Virtual field trips on the internet provide students with first-hand learning experiences and allow for the interactivity and student control delineated in a student-centered constructivist model. Thus, virtual or online field trips for students can become an authentic experience, which is one principle of meaningful learning” (as cited in Ayas, 2006, p.22). An interesting example provided by Wilson, Rice, and Bagley of how virtual field trips have been integrated into the classroom was when high school students participated in a virtual field trip to Mount Vernon. This field trip was used was while the students were studying the American Revolution and George Washington (as cited in Ayas, 2006). This is just one example of many on how virtual field trips can be used effectively in the social studies classroom.

Another example of integrating technology into social studies is through the use of WebQuests. Lipscomb describes the WebQuest as “an inquiry-oriented activity in which some or all of the information that learners interact with comes from resources on the internet” (as cited in Ayas, 2006, p.22). WebQuests have also been praised by Whiteworth and Berson for having “a great potential for cooperative/collaborative learning, by supporting the principles of meaningful learning in the social students classroom” (as cited in Ayas, 2006, p.22). One particular example of how a WebQuest has been used in a social studies classroom comes from Lipscomb, who was cited in Ayas, 2006, when he used a WebQuest to teach his eighth-grade students about the Civil War. Each student in the class had to take on the role of a person living during the Civil War era, such as a Union soldier, or a Female Abolitionist. Students then worked in teams to create an individual journal booklet that could be used for a potential publication. Once students had explored the online site provided for them through the WebQuest, they used their information to create six journal entries. After the conclusion of the project, Lipscomb said, “students enjoyed undertaking the project, and they came away with a stronger understanding of the people who lived during the Civil War. This is very meaningful especially when students often find the social studies and/or American history boring and overwhelmed with a large amount of data (battles, generals, dates, speeches, ect.)” (as cited by Ayas, 2006, p.22).

The third and final example of an effective technology tool to use in the classroom is the educational-based program, Glogster. Glogter is a website where teachers and students are given personal accounts in order to create “Glogs”, which are basically online posters. In Hodgson’s 2010 article, Digital posters: Composing with an online canvas, Hodgson explains some of the benefits of using Glogster in the classroom, “A virtual poster is a flexible platform, in that students can mix, mash-up, and use almost any form of media for a project on an online canvas. This means that along with a summary of understanding and reflections on a topic, such as a style of bridge or a profile of a mathematician, the student can also embed videos, audio files, images, and more on the poster where items are placed, and replaced, through the simple act of moving a mouse” (p. 3). Hodgson makes a good argument about the benefits of using digital posters over traditional posters by pointing out traditional posters take up space and the publication is often short lived, with most posters ending up in a trash can, whereas Glogs provide students with an authentic publishing opportunity to have the world as their audience, and improve their visual literacy skills by learning through a mixture of media and words. Hodgson also provides the reader with some of the “pitfalls” of using Glogster in the classroom. One particular “pitfall” noted was that it is difficult for students to learn the importance of design. Hodgson explains one of these pitfalls as being that there are too many premade materials when using Glogster that take away from the process of creating a project from scratch (Hodgson, 2010). This can become a problem because many students like to use flashy designs that are distracting or inappropriate for the topic being presented. Discussions on visual literacy have to be discussed and taught to students before using a program like Glogster. Another pitfall to using Glogster is that sometimes technology will fail you. Hodgson (2010) provides an example of a teacher running into technical issues while using Glogster: “We run out laptops on a school-wide wireless network hub and there were times when having 20 laptops on the wireless- complete with streaming video into the posters or uploading podcasts- pushed the wireless system to its limit and student work that had not been saved was lost” (p. 6). This is an important consideration when using technology in the classroom, because chances are, you will experience technical difficulties.

Technology Integration and Student Outcomes

In order to determine how effective the technology strategies that are being incorporated into your classroom are, it is important that you provide your students with a variety of different assessments. When we think about assessments, oftentimes we tend to automatically think about the traditional paper-pencil tests which usually consist of multiple choice, matching, and essay questions. These types of assessments can be valuable, but they are not the only types of assessments out there. In fact, to truly assess a student’s knowledge and understanding of a topic, a teacher will have to use a number of different types of assessments to gauge his student’s grasp of a concept. Formative assessments, summative assessments, and projects are a few of the different types of assessments a teacher can use to provide their students with a good variety of assessments.

Summative assessments, as defined by W. James Popham (2010) in his book, Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know, “take place when educators collect test-based evidence to inform decisions about already completed instructional activities such as when statewide accountability tests are administered each spring to determine the instructional effectiveness of a state’s schools during the soon-to-be-completed school year”( p. 271). Summative assessments are what we think about when we think of final exams given by a teacher at the end of a unit or the semester. The main purpose of summative assessments is not to help improve instruction in the classroom, but rather a test to determine a student’s final grade in a class (Popham, 2010).

Formative Assessments are another type of assessment that should be used to assess students. Popham (2010) defines formative assessment as, “A planned process in which assessment-elicited evidence of student’ status sued by teacher to adjust their ongoing instructional procedures or by students to adjust their current learning tactics.” (p. 501) Formative assessments are daily assessments a teacher uses to track her student’s progress and guide her future lessons. Formative assessments can be short, quick assessments like “ticket-out-the-door”, where students must answer a question about the day’s lesson as their “ticket-out-the-door”. Teachers may also use, Newspaper Headlines, where they would have their students create a newspaper headline about one of the topics learned in the day’s lesson. The Kagan Strategies are another popular form of formative assessments, and provide teachers with quick, fun review activities to test their student’s knowledge over previously learned material. Formative assessments are crucial to assessing your student’s progress throughout a unit, if you are only using summative assessments to assess your students, then you will not be receiving an accurate picture of what your students know.

It is also interesting to point out that the research shows that students who are given the opportunity to use technology in the classroom tend to produce higher test scores. According to Taylor and Duran’s (2006) article, Teaching Social Studies with Technology: New Research on Collaborative Approaches, “The positive effects which the use of computers has on student achievement in history have been documented by the United States Department of Education. The more frequently eight- and twelfth- grade students reported using CD-ROMSs or the Internet for research projects, the higher their scores were on the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) in United States history in 2001” (p. 10). Furthermore, the 2006 report produced by the NAEP also explains that students who used computers to aide with writing reports had higher scores than those students who did not use computers (as cited in Taylor & Duran, 2006, p.10).

The proof of higher student achievement on assessment can also be seen directly from teachers. Recently, the University of Michigan-Dearborn was given a grant from the United States Department of Education to fund a four-year program that investigated how incorporating technology into the social studies curriculum affects instruction. The study was called the, “MITTEN Program”, and its participants included twenty-five full-time public school teachers, twenty-five pre-service teachers, five faculty members, and three field supervisors of student teachers (Taylor & Duran, 2006). Some of the qualitative data collected from the MITTEN project shows why teachers involved in the study believe that the integration of technology affects student achievement in a positive way. In the 2006 article, Teaching Social Studies with Technology, Taylor discovered these findings from participants involved in the study. “Educators reported that their students had a greater interest in doing their research after exploring electronic sources. One participating teacher wrote, ‘we created five lessons designed to excite students’ interests and improve student outcomes. They enhanced our curriculum, and students were eager to do more online investigations and create products that reflected their newly gained understanding in a specific area of study’ (p.10). The survey that the teachers involved in the MITTEN project completed after the completion of the program showed that using technology more often maximized student learning (p. 10).

Teachers’ Attitudes

Most teachers would agree that using technology in the classroom can be beneficial, but as educators we also live in the real world. The bottom line is that many teachers like the idea of using technology in their classrooms, but they are also aware of the many different problems that can arise when using technology. Teachers concerns range from not being comfortable with technology, not having the appropriate tools to incorporate technology, and probably one of the biggest issues…time. DebBeste (2003) of California State University says it best in her 2003 article when she says, “One of the major downsides to incorporating technology into one’s classroom remains the time issue. Both anecdotal evidence and research supports this claim. Creating websites, locating valuable historical sources on the web, instructing students in the use of technology and helping them to create credible projects, all takes enormous amounts of times” (p. 501). Another major concern of teachers can be seen through the response of one teacher involved in the MITTEN program, “If I had to pick out something that I would do differently, I would teach the students about plagiarism right away” (Taylor & Duran, 2006, p.14). Many teachers have agreed that teaching students about plagiarism before using the internet is a key factor when incorporating technology into the classroom.

Before teachers begin using technology in their classrooms, they bring their own set of beliefs and attitudes towards the integration of technology. This is important. But, it is also important that teachers look back and reflect on their experiences after using technology in their classes. One of the best ways a teacher can grow and become a better teacher is through reflection. By keeping a reflective journal, a teacher is able to look back on what he has done in their classroom and determine what worked, and what didn’t work. Gil-Garcia and Cinton (2002) put it best when they say,

A reflective journal is a private artifact that stimulates individual reflection. It facilitates the process of reflection of teachers and administrators on teaching and learning, administrative decisions, educational goals, cultural background and differences, repertoire of teaching strategies, individualized attention, differentiated classroom, active learning, and world learning activities among others. By systematically writing in the reflective journal, practitioners acquire a better understanding of his/her students, their likes and dislikes, their ethnic and cultural background, their personalities, and respect and validate their languages and cultures. Expressing in print that knowledge and analyzing the ideas versed, teachers and administrators could make changes, modify or preserve their teaching and administrative practices. (pg. 5)

Many teachers believe that it is important to be reflective, but are sometimes at a loss on how to be a reflective teacher. Gil-Garcia and Cinton give teachers an example of how they can effectively use a reflective journal by introducing the Learning and Professional Development Model (LPDM). “The LPD model focuses on designing and planning around the six reflective strategic priorities: Why we teach, who we teach, what we teach, ways we teach, who teaches, and where we teach. The reflective model focuses on reflective teaching. It also focuses on leadership, not simply management” (Gil-Garcia & Cinton, 2002, pp. 7-8). The LPD is broken down into three different phases; the Teaching and Learning phase, the Instructional Partnership, and the Reflective Educator.

In the Teaching and Learning phase teachers are supposed to set goals about their instruction. They want to strive to create lessons that connect students to the real world, are hands on, and have students actively engaged in the learning process. During this phase teachers should strive to go beyond just teaching students the “basic skills” and information (Gil-Garcia & Cinton, 2002).

The second phase in the LPD is known as the, Instructional Partnership. This particular phase has educators look at who we are teaching, and what other outside influences are shaping the students we are teaching (Gil-Garcia & Cinton, 2002). Teachers need to understand where their students are coming from in order to reach them where they are. When teachers assume that every student in their classroom comes from a safe and loving environment, where education is promoted at home, they will quickly become disappointed when they discover that a student failed to turn in a homework assignment or study for a test. This is why reflecting on who you are teaching becomes so important to being successful in the classroom.

The third and final phase of the LPD model is the Reflective Educator phase. In this final phase, teachers begin to look at why we teach. They “communicate in word and deed high expectations and standards” (Gil-Garcia & Canton, 2002, p.8). They start to not just realize the issues that affect their students, but to actually address them. They also begin respecting the fact that all students learn differently, and are willing to try and find ways to meet the needs of all their students.

If we as teachers are serious about improving our craft, we are going to have to start becoming reflective teachers, and by keeping a reflective journal, we will be able to accomplish that. By taking a step back and truly evaluating ourselves as teachers, and our students as a diverse group of learners, we are saying that we want to continue growing and improving as educators. Whether you are a first-year teacher, or a teacher in his or her twentieth year, there are always ways to make yourself better.

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This was an action research study designed to determine whether or not the integration of technology into the social studies curriculum increases student learning. According to Improving Schools Through Action Research by Hendricks (2009), “The purpose of action research is for practitioners to investigate and improve their practices. The process is one of self-study; thus a teacher engaged in action research may, for example, study ways to increase student learning in his or her class, focusing on his or her intentions, methods, and desired outcomes as part of the investigation” (, p. 3). This study uses both qualitative and quantitative data in order support its results. The qualitative data used was teacher reflective journaling, and student and teacher focus groups. The quantitative data collected was through pre and post test assessments that were aligned with the Georgia Performance Standards for fifth grade social studies.

Setting

The setting of this study was in a fifth grade classroom in Newnan, Georgia. The elementary school where this study was conducted was a Title I school, where 75% of all students were on free and reduced lunch. The population of students tested was extremely transient. It is common to have several students leave, and several new students arrive throughout a school year. There also tends to be a lack of parental involvement across the board at the elementary school where this study took place. Permission from the country school board, as well as the school’s principal was obtained before beginning this study. This location was chosen because I was currently employed as a fifth grade teacher at the school.

Subjects and Participants

The participants in this study were two separate classes of fifth grade students. The first group of participants was a group of nineteen fifth grade students who received a two week lesson plan over World II, in which technology was integrated into all lesson plans. The second group of participants was a group of nineteen fifth grade students who received a two week lesson plan over World War II, in which no technology was integrated into the lesson plans. There was also a group of eight fifth grade students who participated in a focus group discussion on their values and opinions of technology in the classroom. Along with the student’s focus group, nine elementary school teachers, ranging from kindergarten through fifth grade, also participated in a focus group discussion on their opinions and views of using technology as a tool to teach social studies.

Procedures and Data Collection Methods

In Table 3.1 below the data shell helped guide and shape my research during this study. This data shell was guided by three main focus questions, and supported by several different literature sources related to the topic.

Table 3.1. Data Shell

|Focus Question |Literature Sources |Type: Method, Data, |How are data analyzed? |Rationale |

| | |Validity | | |

|What strategies are the |Ayas, C. (2006) |Method: |Coded for themes aligned with focus|The reflective journal will contain|

|most effective for | |Instructional Plan |questions |methods used to implement |

|integrating technology into|Hodgson, K. (2010) |and rubric | |technology into the social studies |

|social studies education? | | | |curriculum. |

| | |Data: Qualitative | | |

| | | | | |

| | |Validity: Content | | |

|How does incorporating |DenBeste, M. (2003) |Method: |Dependent t-test and independent |The questions on the pre-test and |

|technology into the social | |Assessments |t-test |post-test will be aligned with the |

|studies curriculum affect |Popham, J. (2000) | | |5th grade Georgia Performance |

|student learning? | |Data: | |standards for social studies. |

| |Taylor, J. & Duran, |Quantitative | | |

| |M. (2006) | | | |

| | |Validity: Content | | |

|What are the opinions and |Gil-Garcia, A. & |Method: |Coded for themes aligned with focus|Questions and topics will come |

|attitudes of students and |Cintron, Z. (2002) |Reflective Journal |questions |directly from the review of the |

|teachers towards the | | | |literature. |

|integration of technology |Taylor, J. & Duran, |Data: | | |

|into the social studies |M. (2006) |Qualitative | | |

|curriculum? | | | | |

| | |Validity: Construct | | |

Before beginning the review of the literature, I created three main focus questions to guide my research. My first focus question was focused on actual strategies and lesson plan ideas that could be used to integrate technology into my classroom. Ayas’ (2006) article, An Examination of the Relationship Between the Integration of Technology Into Social Studies and Constructivist Pedagogies, was beneficial in helping me to answer my first focus question because he highlighted several practical ways that technology could be integrated into the social studies curriculum. This author was also beneficial in helping me with my research because he presented his information through a constructivists’ point of view on student learning. The instructional plan I created for this study (see Appendix A) provided my students with the opportunity to use the computer program, Glogster. Which is why Hodgson’s (2010) article, Digital posters: Composing with an online canvas was useful in understanding some of the benefits and pitfalls to using Glogster in the classroom. My students used the Glogster program to create an online poster of a famous World War II figure or major event. The instructional plan sought to provide my group of fifth grade students with a chance to incorporate technology into the social studies curriculum. In order to make sure I created a plan that would be both meaningful and successful in my classroom, I consulted the advice of one of my fellow colleagues. The colleague consulted had been teaching for over ten years, had obtained a masters degree in reading, and had taught special education, middle school, and fifth grade throughout her career. I provided this trusted colleague with a rubric to evaluate the overall effectiveness of my instructional plan.

My second focus question was focused on how integrating technology into the social studies curriculum affects student achievement. During the research of this particular question, I was hoping to discover if using technology to teach social studies would raise students test scores and overall understanding of the social studies topics being taught. I turned to Popham’s (2010) book, Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know, to help me answer this question because Popham does an excellent job in explaining, in detail, why teachers need to know about assessment, what and how to assess, and what is means to have reliability, validity, and the absence of bias when creating assessments. He also provides a number of alternate assessments that can be used in the classroom to provide a variety of assessment options for students. Constructed-Response, Performance Task assessments, and Portfolio assessments are just a few of the different types of assessments that Popham discusses in his book. In order to assess whether or not incorporating technology into the social studies curriculum raises student achievement, I used a pre and post test assessment over the major people, events, and results of World War II. The pre and post test I used to assess my students was twenty-six questions long and consisted of a multiple-choice section, short answer section, matching section, and two essay questions.

My third and final focus question focused on what students’ and teachers’ attitudes hold about the use of technology in the social studies curriculum. In order to determine the teachers’ and students’ attitudes of using technology in the social studies classroom, I facilitated two focus groups (see Appendix B). . The first focus group consisted of a group of eight fifth graders from my class who participated in the study. Four of the students were boys, and four students were girls. My second focus group consisted of one fifth grade teacher, one fourth grade teacher, and one third grade teacher, one second grade teacher, one first grade teacher, one kindergarten teacher, one technology teacher, one music teacher, and one gifted teacher. Both focus groups were led in a discussion on their thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes towards using social studies in the classroom. In order to provide further data for question three, I completed my own reflective journal (see Appendix C) throughout this action research study. I provided feedback on the progress of this study three times a week. I hoped to capture my thoughts, beliefs, and attitude about this study through the use of the reflective journal.

Validity, Reliability, Dependability, and Bias

Focus Questions 1

For focus question one the qualitative data gathering method used was an instructional plan that incorporated technology into the social studies curriculum, as well an interview conducted with a fellow colleague. During the interview process, I was provided with feedback and opinions on the overall success of my instructional plan. The effectiveness of standards, essential questions, differentiation, assessments, and the integration of technology were all addressed during the interview process. The data collected through the instructional plan and interview was all qualitative data.

In focus question one of this study, both content and construct validity were used. Content validity centers on how well the test item represents the related discipline, and construct validity is a non-measureable characteristic such as intelligence or disposition. According to Popham (2010), dependability goes hand in hand with concepts of accuracy and consistency. The dependability for focus question one was evident through all data collection and treatments being kept consistent, control of the data collection setting, and selection of an adequate number of participants. This study is also dependable because the length of time for the data collection process was persistent and prolonged over a two week period. In order to make sure this study did not contain any forms of bias; all instruments will be checked for unfairness, offensiveness, and disparate impact.

Focus Question Two

The quantitative data gathering method used for focus question two was a teacher made pre and post test assessment over World War II. The type of data that will be used is interval data, and content validity, which relates to how well a test item represents the related discipline, will used to validate focus question two. According to Hendricks (2009), “The term validity has a number of meanings in educational research. In quantitative research, validity can refer to the degree to which results are true for the participants (internal validity), the degree to which the results can be generalized beyond the participants in the study (external validity), or the degree to which a test or assessment measures what it is supposed to measure (test validity)” (p. 111). Reliability relates to quantitative data, and focuses on how well research can be repeated with consistency. The main goal of reliability is to minimize errors and biases so that a study can be replicated. This studies reliability will be based on a test-retest correlation for dependent t-tests. All pre and post tests will be checked for unfairness, offensiveness, and disparate impact to make sure there were no forms of bias on any of the assessments given.

Focus Question Three

The data gathering method used for focus question three was qualitative data. The qualitative data used was gathered through two separate focus groups and a teacher’s reflective journal. The first focus group was centered around a group of fifth graders, and the second focus group included a group of elementary school teachers. The type of validity used for focus question three was construct validity, which is a non-measureable characteristic such as intelligence or disposition. The focus groups and reflective journal used in focus question three can be considered dependable because all interviewees checked transcripts for accuracy and all raw data was maintained and well organized. Because the risk of bias can arise when using a reflective journal and focus groups, all instruments were checked for unfairness, offensiveness, and disparate impact.

Analysis of Data

The data collected to answer Focus Question One were qualitatively through the use of an instructional plan, and interview. All qualitative data in focus question one was coded for recurring themes.

The data collected to answer Focus Question Two were quantitative. The quantitative data that was used for focus question two is a dependent t-test. This particular test was used to determine if there were significant differences between means from one group tested twice. The decision to reject the null hypothesis was set at p ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download