A computer by any other name.

Abstract

This article describes results of a case study research project that investigated three teachers involved in the Eruditio teacher-training program in which Arizona teachers trained to integrate computer technology into their curricula and instruction. The study examined their approaches to their teaching, and if and how their approaches changed when incorporating telecommunications and Internet use into their instructional delivery. Case study research was conducted using interviews, classroom observations, and journals for qualitative data. An important issue that emerged while conducting this study concerns the way we refer to computers and how our language may impact students' and teachers' attitudes toward them.

Introduction

Computers have been in many of our schools for twenty years but only in the last few years, with the advent of the Interact, has use of computers become a staple of teaching. As teachers integrate this technology into their curriculum, it may be helpful to examine our assumptions concerning computer use in schools. Does the terminology we use to refer to computers affect students and teachers' attitudes toward them?

I recently conducted a research study with three teachers to observe changes in teaching practices and beliefs when attempting to integrate technology into their classroom teaching. The study was designed to provide flexibility for emerging issues and themes during the study. A prominent issue to surface concerned teachers' and students' divergent attitudes concerning computer use in the classroom. Little research is available about students' attitudes toward computers outside the formalized setting of the classroom. This paper explores the implications of these views on the process of teaching with technology. The conclusions suggest we look more closely at the way we talk about computers and their uses in school.

The Research Study

This study investigated the experiences of three teachers from different areas of Arizona taking part in the Eruditio Teacher Training Project. The Eruditio Project was a collaborative effort between Arizona's Department of Education and the four major educational institutions in the state for a teacher technology-training program. The Eruditio Project's aim was to create a network of teachers trained in the use of computer technology who could pass this knowledge on to others in their schools. The Eruditio teachers received the necessary networking tools in the form of a laptop computer, a modem, and Internet accessibility. In addition, they received on-line technical support, and both in-person and on-line instruction concerning the integration of technology and telecommunications into their existing curricula. The Eruditio Project was designed as a two-year training course. It was expected that, after the first year of training, educators would progress into a second phase of utilizing this knowledge and training others in the use of these tools. This study examined the experiences of three Eruditio Project teachers as they moved through the second year of the training program.

Case study research was conducted using interviews, classroom observations, and journals for qualitative data. The three teacher participants, Abby, Beverly, and Chloe, reported that using computers as an integral part of teaching led to a change from text-only resources in the classroom to using the Internet for the most current information. This led to an increased student interest in learning, and enhanced the professional role of these among their peers. While these changes showed how technology may alter classroom roles and instruction, the different perceptions teachers and students had of the technology's function suggest that computers went beyond just supplementing classroom teaching. The discussion that follows explores the issue of teachers' and students' beliefs from the teachers' perspectives.

Computers Are Tools

All three teachers reported technology was used as a powerful tool to support teaching. Abby, teaching at an inner city high school that served exclusively at-risk, often homeless students, defined the laptop at the beginning of the Eruditio Project. "We were given the tools to use it ... those three days [initial August training conference] gave me enough hands-on, holding that laptop, plugging it in, manipulating it, if you will, that I was comfortable." Abby saw the computer as another resource in her teaching toolbox. "Eruditio has given me another tool, a very powerful tool and I sense it's just one more trick in my bag."

Beverly, teaching second grade in a rural elementary school, agreed that Eruditio provided a useful tool to help her with her teaching job. "They gave us the machines and the access to do those things we wanted to do." Chloe, a Special Education high school teacher in a large university town, described the impact of having Internet access for her students in practical terms. "It's just given students another venue to utilize ... it's enhanced the ability to get our hands on new materials ... technology is a great tool to get students hooked into different things." This utilitarian vision of technology as a tool is consistent with previous studies that reported teachers regard computers as teaching tools rather than add-on incentives to their classroom activities (Kerr, 1991; Sandholtz, Ringstaff, and Dwyer, 1997).

Computers Are Magic

The teachers' students in this study had differing views on the opportunities to use the technology in the classroom. The students appeared to experience the computer as something far more interesting than just a teaching tool. Abby reported, "Along the way, magical things occurred ... the tan boxes [the computers] no longer scared the students; instead, the boxes intrigued them." Beverly noted "the drawing power of the piece of technology," on her students. She reported a near obsession among her students with spending time on the machines. Students even voiced concern that they would have no access to the technology for the summer vacation period. Chloe noticed that reaching the wider audience of the Internet had a greater affect than her teaching. "It changed their whole perception of what they were doing. It made their project really important."

The teachers in this study reported technology affecting their students in more ways than a mere vehicle of information. On closer inspection, teachers too seemed affected by the learning experience. "Teaching is no longer the same for me," Abby remarked. Beverly considered that her teaching methods had been forever changed by the use of computers. She reported feeling like she was "shot out in space with no directions to get back." Chloe admitted that for her, "It has been a huge paradigm shift."

The changes reported in the classrooms suggest that the technology may have implications that go beyond being mere teaching machines. Chloe spoke of her students networking, "I see kids networking with other kids in totally different ways." Students often used computers to communicate with friends as well as meet new friends in chats. Chloe also saw her computer as a connective means to others. Chloe described her laptop as her "window to the technological world," and suspected there was more out there to discover by stating, "I felt like we were just beginning to hit the tip of the iceberg." Abby spoke of the technology-training program in terms of an opportunity to go to otherwise inaccessible places." Eruditio has opened up paths for many of us that we might not have easily found." Beverly too recognized that the computer is "more than just programs, the world is there for us to explore and bring into our classroom."

Discussion

Computer use is usually based on pragmatic applications of the teachers' already existing epistemologies (Marshal, 2000). The issue raised by these observations is whether the teachers defining technology as tools also defined the way technology was used in their classrooms. Kerr (1991) maintains that technology used in schools perhaps should be viewed as more intrinsic artifacts of our culture.

If educational technology is seen as a cultural artifact rather than a monodimensional device, it may follow that the ways it influences practice indirectly, the way it interacts with existing modes of classroom life, and the ways teachers' images of their own work evolve to take technology into account are in fact more important to examine than the number or percentage of teachers who decide to `use a computer' over a given period of time. (p. 121)

Regarding technology used by these three teachers as teaching tools and inadvertently supporting this view in my interactions with them during this study may have affected the outcomes. Perhaps in the rush to assure educators that technology's presence in the classroom was not to replace teachers, we have overlooked the social and cultural functions of technology. In doing so, have we in turn, imposed limitations on the technology and the degree it will be integrated into curricular and instructional designs? The varying levels of technology integration in my study may have had more to do with conceptualizing technology's function rather than the teachers' place on the learning curve. There is a connection between a word and what it represents. By naming an object, we give it its power (Rothwell, 1982). Language shapes our perceptions of our experiences and in turn, helps define them. The phrase "digital divide" has been used to describe two classes of computer users according to whether they "have" or "have not" computers. Perhaps another chasm exists between teachers' and students' concepts of computer use.

Conclusions

The most important issue with technology use by teachers appears to be the kinds of practices they experience when learning to use technology (Miller and Olson, 1995). Moving beyond the concept of computers as mere teaching machines may require that we model inventive uses of technology during teacher training. Use activities that will appeal to the age group of the students that teachers will eventually serve. This could mean exploring strategies with a networking or game-based epistemology that recognize students' out-of-school experiences with computers.

Recent research data suggests there is a direct relationship between the kind of computer use students experience and the attitudes they have toward computers (Francis, 1993; Mitra & Hullett, 1997). In a research study with psychology students, Anderson and Hornby (1996) found that students exhibited more positive attitudes with computers when allowed experimentation than when computers were used only to teach course content. This suggests that a looser "guided experiment" approach to curricula goals may work better than a regimented "stay-within-these-lines" approach. Perhaps a rethinking of technology's varied influences in our society and culture, particularly from the perspective of our students, calls for a reframing of our terminology.

The findings reported here with the interpretive conclusions I have made point to a relationship between teachers' perceptions of what computers can be used for and the way they use those computers in teaching. However, the challenge of how to get beyond the utilitarian perspective of computer use is left for future articles. Success in using computers in teaching may well begin with expanding our vocabularies to reflect students' perceptions of the computer's role in their lives.

References

Anderson, M., & Hornby, P. (1996). Symposium: Computer attitudes and the use of computers in psychology courses. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 341-346.

Fosnot, C. T. (1992). Constructing constructivism. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Francis, L. (1993). Measuring attitudes toward computers among undergraduate college students: The affective domain. Computers and Education, 30, 251-255.

Kerr, S. T. (Fall 1991). Lever and fulcrum: Educational technology in teachers' thought and practice. Teachers College Record, 93(1), (pp. 114-136). Teachers College, Columbia University.

Marshal, G. (March, 2000). Models, metaphors, and measures: Issues in distance learning. Educational Media International, 37 (1), 2-10.

Miller, L., & Olson, J. (1995). How computers live in schools. Educational Leadership, 53(2), 74-77.

Mitra, A., & Hullett, C. (1997). Toward evaluating computer-aided instruction: Attitudes, demographics, context. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20, 379-391.

Rothwell, D. (1982). Telling it like it isn't. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.

Mary was awarded the Doctor of Education Degree by Northern Arizona University. She has worked as a curricular consultant for university web-based instruction and is currently teaching education courses for pre-service teachers.