The article “Technology Integration Practice as a Function of Pedagogical Expertise” examines how teachers at different stages of teaching expertise and technology proficiency use technology within their classrooms.  The author, Melissa Pierson, observed 16 teachers who were identified as excellent users of technology.  She wanted to get a feel for the classroom routines and how technology was integrated with them.   Early on in her observations she realized that although all of these teachers were highly recommended for their use of technology their levels of expertise with technology and with teaching practices varied greatly (Pierson 2001).  She therefore decided to change the focus of her study from just examining very good technology users to comparing the different levels of technology use and teaching skills.

 

The observed teachers were then classified into categories based on their teaching ability and their level of technology integration.  Five categories were outlined but because of the small pool of teacher chosen for the study only teacher who fit the middle three were found.  After categorizing all of the teachers she chose one teacher she felt best summarized each level to observe more in-depth and use for her case study.  The three case study teachers were observed for about one month during one school year and were interview twice during this time.

 

According to Pierson, each of the teachers was asked to “think aloud” when preparing for lessons that integrated technology and make notes of any important concerns regarding technology use and organization.  The three teachers also kept a log of personal and profession computer use for one week of the study.

 

Steve, the teacher who fit into category 2 was very knowledgeable of technology and used it well for administrative purposes but his use within his teaching practices was poor.   His focus for student activities was to explore software of interest to him rather than on the material being covered within the content areas.  The author notes that Steve’s general teaching practice is traditional teacher centered instruction with a reliance on the textbook.  Steve’s district does not have an official guide to technology integration, so he was forced to make his own decisions for technology use (Pierson 2001).  Because of knowledge of software and operating systems he was able to improvise and troubleshoot problems, but he did not put sufficient thought into his lesson plan to avoid student difficulties in the computer lab or make connections to learning situations in the classroom.  Throughout all of the content areas that Steve taught there was an emphasis of test taking except with technology.  There were no formal assessments planned for technology.  According to Pierson’s notes, Steve said he made mental notes and that he had a pretty good idea of where all the kids are.

 

Jill, who fits category 3, is an experienced teacher who sees that technology will become a part of education, but is dependent on past teaching tools and practices.  Pierson includes that Jill’s planning was based on past experience of what worked well and what she’d like to try.  Based on the log, lessons that did not include technology were quickly and easily developed.  The author notes that when planning lessons with technology she was very deliberate including step by step instructions so that students would learn specific skills.  “Jill saw the potential for computers but had yet found a meaningful way to include them into her regular classroom routines (Pierson 2001).  Use of the computer would often be offered as a choice or center activity when the other work more pressing work was finished.  According to the author, she formal assessed students’ skills with technology by including observational records and checklists.

 

The last teacher in the case study is Sheila, who fit into category 4.  Pierson states that she is an experienced teacher who sees technology as a tool to help teach the content.  She has five computers in her classroom and provides many chances for students to use word processing, the Internet, drawing programs, and problem solving software.  Sheila’s log shows that there was not much difference between how she plans for technology lessons and those that do not include technology.  She reviewed the district curriculum guides and focused on her past experiences.  The author also includes that Sheila often asked her students to help her plan upcoming lessons.  She was sure to use technology when necessary and in the appropriate manner.  Pierson also notes that management of the computers in her classroom was well planned out.  The older computers were used for word processing, and the more up-to-date computers were used for software that needed more power.  She also didn’t have a schedule of computer time to be sure all students cycled through.  Computer time was decided upon by the how pressing it was to have an assignment complete.

 

Technology integration meant three different things to three different teachers based on the information in Pierson’s study.  Pierson feels that districts need to come with own individual definition of what technology integration is so that there can be consistency.  She concludes that from this study it is apparent that for a teacher to truly integrate technology into the classroom he needs to incorporate content knowledge, technology knowledge and excellent teaching skills.    

 

This article fits well with Standard V because of its focus on three specific teachers and their professional practice with technology.  Not all of the teachers were completely comfortable or proficient at incorporating technology, but it showed the different stages that many are at.  It is important to keep in mind that with more experience, discussion and practice teachers will continue to develop new and more effective was to incorporate technology.

 

I thought the article was well written and gave detailed information about each of the teachers and their teaching practices.  At times it was a little too detailed and redundant.  The way it was organized was also a little confusing.  The author tried to discuss commonalities of the teachers in her study, but she kind of skipped back and forth between the three.  The article made me think about my own teaching practices and how I incorporate technology. 

 

Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology Integration as a Function of Pedagogical Expertise.              Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 4.