ETEC 500 65C

Cecilia Sun

Student # 40396020

Article Critique #3

Article Critique in Educational Technology Introduction This article critique will examine three articles in the field of educational technology and students (ages 8-13) learning. The articles are The effect of incorporating a word processor into a year three writing program (Beck & Fetherston, 2003), Middle school students technology practices and preferences (Miller, Schweinbruber & Bradenburg, 2001), and Technology lecturer turned technology teacher (Lee, 2009). The first two articles employees different research methods to look at student attitude toward various types of educational technology, while the last articles examines attitude of teacher of educational technology. I will examine the strength and weakness in each research and overall underlying challenges across these research papers.

The effect of word processor in a writing program Beck and Fetherston (2003) uses a qualitative research method of case studies involving interviews and writing scores on a small sample of seven 8 years old students. They studied student attitude towards writing and the effect of word processing on writing. The conclusion was that students enjoyed writing more and writing level increased after the implementation of word processing compared to traditional writing method. One issue with this research is that while student improvement is seen over the period of the study, the cause of which could be due to more than the variable of word processor. It may be due to the natural progression of student learning from their mistakes over time or it may be due to the lack of a control variable in the experiment. Perhaps

students in a class where word processor is not introduced could also improve as much over that time. The environment in which the experiment is conducted is also important to consider carefully. The author didnt describe if students moved to a different room to access the computers, in which case they may perceive the physical change as the positive experience. The extent of researcher involvement during the experiment is also unclear. The increased support from higher adult to student ratio in the classroom may contribute to improved writing and experience for the student also.

Middle school students technology practices Miller, Schweingruber, & Bradenburg (2001) used questionnaires to survey 512 middle school students on their perception of their own computer skills, their exposure and their preference for content on the computer. The main conclusions from the survey include that no major difference in gender or socio-economic level is found for technology use and most students used computers for gaming. Issues with the study include an unclear hypothesis. Three general areas of interest are used to focus the survey questions instead. This also contributes to the difficulty of finding an overall conclusion to the study. The survey questions also include response choices that may be redundant or unclear to students. Examples are homework assignments and projects, or games and simulations. The study uses 512 students across 8 schools ranging from ages 11-15. Narrowing the age sampled and compensate with more schools over a diverse socio-economic range could minimize the problem with the large age group. Finally, self-reporting on a survey may not be the most reliable way to find out

about student computer skills. Parents and teachers of these students could also be surveyed too look for consistency across responses.

Technology lecturer turned teacher Lee (2009) conducted a case study of 6 college lecturers who taught a technology program to 11-12 year olds over a year period. Students came to the college for lessons once a week. The lecturers were given a questionnaire before the start of the program, interviews and anecdotal evidence throughout the program and a questionnaire at the end of the program. The study found that the lecturers experience was initially negative but grew more positive as the program progressed. The lecturers reported that expectation to collaborate with teachers was not met, but otherwise viewed the experience as fulfilling personally and professionally. They refreshed their skills working with children of this age group and gained credibility with colleagues. They also felt students were more engaged in the program as it progressed. Issues in this study include that the researchers are also participant observers in the study. If field notes are not taken right after the lessons, details may be lost. The lecturers self-reporting could easily be biased. Each lecturer communicated his or her expectation from the program. However these are not standardized and some lecturer has not taught students of that age group in a long time and realized after the start of the program that their expectation is not likely to be met by the students. This high initial expectation may also affect the outcome of the questionnaire. The type and format of the lesson was also varied. Some taught in teams, while others individually. This factor should be consistent to standardize the experience of the lecturers. Finally, the lecturers goal was to enrich

students technology program at school but little information is given on students experience. The questionnaire could be modified to address this and the students and their teachers response could also be included in this study.

Synthesis and conclusion An interesting theme to note from the three research articles is students apparent interest in technology (word processor, computers and technology enhanced lessons respectively) compared to traditional teaching methods. Observers see an increase in student engagement when technology is introduced in Beck and Fetherstons and Lees study. While students perceive themselves as having good computer skills, questions arise as to whether student engagement is due to a change in learning environment and teaching style or due to the introduction of technology alone. Study duration could also be prolonged in each case to determine if engagement is also sustained over time. The three research articles are conducted from different perspectives. The first one from an outside observers point of view, the second from the students self-perspective, and the last from the teachers (lecturer) point of view. Looking at each study in isolation, we can see that the method of collecting data (self-reporting in the second two studies) is limiting. In the last article, the lecturers describe difficulties such as time, collaboration, and high expectation of the student as some challenges they faced in implementing a technology program. If in each case, data could be collected from a variety of sources to look for the broader impact of the factors introduced in each study can have on all those involved (student, parent, teacher, etc.).

Another issue that arose from the studies is the lack of standardized criteria and validity on questionnaires and marking rubric. Perhaps this problem stems form the lack of a curriculum on technology achievements for students. What are the expectations teachers should have for their technology program? We could take the lessons learned from these studies to build towards a technology curriculum that communicates clearly skills and goals teachers can help students achieve.

References: Beck, N and Fetherston, T. (2003). The effect of incorporating a word processor into a year three writing program. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2003(1), 139-161. Lee, K. (2009). Technology lecturer turned technology teacher. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 20(2), 79-90. Miller, L., Schweingruber, H., & Bradenburg, C. (2001). Middle school students technology practices and preferences: Re-examining gender differences. Journal of Education Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(2), 125-140.