1. Researching Technology in South Dakota Classrooms Dr. Debra Schwietert TIE Presentation April 2010 Research Findings

2. Research Questions The specific research questions for this study are as follows: 1. What math and science software is used in grades three through five classrooms in South Dakota? 2. How are grades three through five teachers using math and science software? 3. What factors influence and limit use of math and science software to teach curriculum standards in grades three through five in South Dakota. 4. What relationship exists between teacher gender and software use? 5. What relationship exists between rural and urban schools in math and science software that is used in SD? 6. What relationship exists between student gender and software use? 7. How do teachers evaluate specific math and science software relevant to gender issues?

3. Significance of the Study With the considerable investment in computer hardware and software by the schools of South Dakota, it is important to monitor how the equipment is being used and whether it is used equitably. Parents and educators alike may be interested in the equitable use of technology in the classroom and types of software to supplement the curriculum. South Dakota, with the addition of technology standards and state technology testing, increased the importance of equity in and the attention to technology education. This study may help in determining avenues to improving access and use of technology in elementary classrooms.

4. Methodology This study was a replication and expansion of Jassmann’s study (2004) on music technology used in K-12 public school classrooms. The intention of this study was to examine the status of math and science technology access, use, gender preferences, and gender bias in the 3-5 curriculum in South Dakota public schools. In addition, this research examined teacher demographics, software preferences, bias in program choices, and teacher proficiency levels.

5. Survey A 27 item survey instrument was developed based on a review of literature which included published reports of the findings of prior studies (AAUW, 2000; Bauer 2000; Herring et al., 2005; Jassmann, 2004; South Dakota Department of Education, 2007c; Wilson, Notar, & Yunker, 2003). Jassmann issued permission to use and adapt the survey instrument. Items addressed the status of math and science technology access, use, gender preferences, teacher demographics, software preferences, bias in program choices, evaluation of software for gender bias, and teacher proficiency levels in the 3 rd to 5 th grade curriculum in South Dakota public schools. Most of the items were presented in a multiple-choice format. There were 18 open-ended items.

6. Results The following graphs indicate teachers’ access to technology, software available, obstacles to learning about technology, and methods of use of technology.

7. Access to Computers for Direct Instruction Survey items 10, 15, and 16 were analyzed to determine access teachers have to computers. The frequencies and percentages of responses to survey item 10 are shown in Table 14. Just over two-thirds of respondents have multiple computers in the classroom and labs in other areas. Only one respondent had no access to computers.

8. Purpose of Math Software Usage in the Classroom Table 12 reflects percentages of teachers employing math software. About two- thirds of teachers responded they used math software for supplemental instruction, and just under half used the software as curriculum or practice tutorials. Approximately a sixth of respondents used software the least as a method of rewarding students’ behavior.

9. Math Software Slightly more than half of teachers reported having access to software for teaching math standards. Geometry and number sense were most often reported as math standards that teachers have software for instruction. Teachers had the least access to software for instruction in statistics and probability. Table 4 depicts the number of software titles and percentages of respondents that reported access to math software.

10. Science Software Almost eight out of ten teachers had no access to science software. The science and technology standard had the least software available for instruction. Teachers most often had earth science standards software. Results are depicted in Table 8.

11. Number of Technology Resources in Classrooms About three- fourths of the teachers reported that they did not have access to science software and seven out of ten have no online science resources.

12. Obstacles to Using Math and Science Software in Teaching Item 15 asked teachers to indicate what obstacles impede using more math and science software in their teaching. Table 15 reports respondents’ choices. Lack of time was the greatest obstacle for six out of ten teachers. Lack of software was almost as noteworthy. Only one in ten respondents chose lack of desire to use math and science software in teaching.

13. Learning About Educational Software Item 16 depicts major obstacles to learning more about educational software in Table 16. Lack of time was the biggest obstacle to learning more about technology and poor quality of training was the smallest issue.

14. Frequencies of Software Use by Students in Classrooms Table 11 depicts frequencies and percentages reported by respondents. Students use math software more than science in the classroom; seven out of ten students used math software, and just under half used science. When software was utilized, it was most often infrequent (two or less times per month).

15. Rural and Urban Obstacles to Software in Schools Obstacles to using math and science software are compared in Table 26 by rural and urban responses. The most common barriers were lack of time and lack of software for both community sizes. Least common barrier was lack of desire to use math and science software for both.

16. Time Spent on the Computers by Gender Survey item 19 asked teachers which gender spends more time on computers, shown in Table 28. Almost nine out of ten teachers reported that equal time was spent using computers.

17. Content Area Preferences by Gender Items 21-22 asked teachers what content areas of software girls and boys prefer. Both boys and girls favored math, with language arts second for girls and science second for boys. Table 29 reflects teacher responses.

18. Work Preferences by Gender About half of boys and girls did not have preferences in how they work on computers. Work styles were about equally split for girls, but boys preferred individual to group work.

19. How Technology is Determined for Classroom Use About eight out of ten teachers choose the technology that students use in the classroom.

20. Evaluation of Math and Science Software Relevant to Gender Appropriateness Over half of respondents did not evaluate software for gender appropriateness. Very few teachers used an instrument to evaluate software.

21. Key Findings The following conclusions have been drawn from the analysis of the data and the findings of the study. Based on data received from the respondents: 1. Most teachers had a significant amount of access to hardware. 2. This study has shown a significant lack of software and use of online resources in the classroom. 3. Teachers most often use math and science software as supplemental instruction and practice tutorials. 4. Few teachers use math and science software more than once a week to plan lessons and very few classrooms use math (17%) or science (4%) software weekly with students. 5. Most teachers responding to this survey have computers, yet they lack the software for classroom use. 6. Teachers lack financial resources to purchase software for the classroom.

22. Key Findings 7. Obstacles preventing teachers from learning to use software programs and online resources include lack time (60%), and to a lesser degree, lack of knowledge (23%). 8. The most common interest for software was math for both boys and girls. Boys second choice was science and girls was language arts. 9. In the majority of grade 3-5 classrooms, boys and girls spend equal amounts of time using computers. 10. No preference exists for either gender for working alone or in a group when using computers. 11. Most teachers do not evaluate software for gender preferences, but some look it over subjectively.

23. Recommendations for Practice 1.It is suggested that the State of South Dakota adopt gender standards for technology resources and have a gender bias assessment tool available to teachers from state websites. 2.Computer access should be provided to all teachers in the state. There should be at least two computers in each classroom, one for teacher use and one for student use. 3.Access to math and science software should be provided to all teachers who teach in those content areas. 4.More teachers should be encouraged to use technology in the classroom and given professional development to facilitate the effective use of technology resources. 5.Teachers and administrators should seek grants and further money to purchase sufficient hardware and software for classrooms.

24. Recommendations For Further Study Based on the finding and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations for further research are offered: 1.It is recommended that a follow-up study be done in a few years to determine any change in technology access and use in South Dakota. 2.The study should be expanded to include teachers and schools in other states to determine if the results are unique to South Dakota. 3.It would be interesting to study online resources and evaluate the effectiveness and worth of using them in the classroom.

25. Discussion Suggestions for further research? Questions Comments

26. Future research What suggestions do you have for a follow-up study? Is it important to improve the 8 th Grade Technology Assessment results?

27. Data Collection I did not anticipate numbers problems Emailed non-respondents Put survey online (Survey Monkey) Sent link to non-respondents Double response

28. Math and Science Technology Access and Use in South Dakota Public Schools Grades Three Through Five Copyright © 2008 Debra Schwietert All Rights Reserved