Methods

1. Technology in the Classroom: Effects on Student Perceptions in a Conceptual Chemistry Classroom Elizabeth Smith Northern Illinois University and Illinois Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program Introduction Methods Conclusions Results In the fall of 2010, approximately 200 students were involved in data collection from the Chemistry classrooms of two teachers. Data was collected for the last two chapters of “Unit 1: Water”, lasting approximately four weeks. Every day, at the end of every period, students filled out an identical, 8-question survey. To insure consistency, answers to #1 (major activity) & #2 (technology or software used) were usually defined by the teacher for the class as a whole. Students were then asked to rank their own perception of their control, motivation, time on-task, and effort throughout the previous period. A total of 1866 surveys were completed, collected, and analyzed. Because the answers to student surveys were presented as a continuum, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used. This allowed us to look for patterns in the amount or type of technology used and the students’ perceptions of their control, motivation, time on-task, and effort. The constant pursuit of every teacher is to increase the learning that takes place in their classroom. As I have evolved in my teaching, I have increased the use of various technologies in my classroom: both my use of these technologies and the use of them by students. In my experience, using these seems to keep students more engaged than they are at other times in my class. I believed that the more engaged they were in the learning process, then the more content they will maintain. Since technology is usually more interactive than the “traditional” classroom, I believed that this would increase the students’ feelings of ownership in the learning process. This study was conducted in order to better understand the actual effects of technology in the classroom on students’ feelings of ownership, motivation, and learning. In this current economic environment, even the best of public schools are having to tighten their budgets. Administrators must justify every penny spent, while still meeting the ever-demanding AYP goals set by NCLB; more than ever, a student’s learning is being assessed through standardized test scores. At the same time, a new generation of tech-savvy teachers are climbing the ranks within the schools and demanding that new, expensive technologies are brought into the classroom. In order to justify this expense, administrations need to know that the addition of each technology will increase students learning and understanding of course content. In my research I sought to answer: How does the use of technology impact student attitudes? • ANOVA • Based on technology used, significant differences in: • Control • Motivation • Time On-Task • Effort • Post Hoc tests • Tukey-B approach for each of the four variables • Lab-based activities • Highestresponses in • Control • Motivation • Time On-Task • Effort • Teacher Using Technology and No Technology • Lowest responses in • Control • Motivation • Time On-Task • Effort • Students Using Technology • No difference in • Time On-Task • Effort • Significantly higher • Control • Motivation • Labs are significant. • This will not come as a surprise to any lab-science teacher, yet it is a sound reminder that not only are there large amounts of content and application-based learning taking place, but that the students themselves are cognizant of the significance of lab activities. • Technology alone isn’t enough. • Students, as in labs, need to be actively engaged with the technology for it to make a major impact on their perceptions of their own learning. • Student-centered, interactive technologies are best. • This study shows that integrating technology in this way significantly impacted students’ self-perception of control, effort, motivation, and time on-task. • Teachers should use technology already available. • Getting students involved and engaged in the learning process increases their own perception of their learning. • Evaluate the usefulness of potential new technology. • Are students able to understand and explore the technology, or will they be following strict directions? • Can this be used in a lab setting? • Will the students be actively participating? • Where is the focus: student or teacher? Acknowledgements • Jo Ann Porter, fellow teacher and researcher • Penny Billman, data analysis • ITEAMS - Integrated Technology and Engineering to Advance Math and Science • Northern Illinois University • Illinois Math and Science Partnership Program