Running Head: Dissertation Critique 1

Dissertation Critique 1
Keith D. George
AIL 689
Dr. M. Rice

Dissertation Critique 1

Title and Source

The dissertation titled Impact of Technology Coach on Confidence and Skill Levels of
Teachers in a Technologically-driven Classroom by Donald Garrett, Jr., was published in 2008
and was completed for Northcentral University. The title implies a thorough evaluation of the
role of technology coach and its effect on classroom teachers. I found this to be misleading
Theoretical Background for Study and/or Literature Review

The background for the study was inadequate. At the most, the author stated that the

increased prevalence of technology coaches in schools raised a need for the study of their
effectiveness. The author stated that current training methods were not effective, however,
this was based upon conversations many teachers have had with the researcher. (Garrett,
2008) Little attention was given to establish a research-based need for additional or different
methods of providing professional development.

The literature review raised several questions as well. The author includes just over

sixty citations in the literature review; however, many of these citations are from the same
sources. In fact, a 2005 article by William Sugar accounts for nine of these references and a
2002 article by Wiles and Bondi was cited seven times. These two works alone account for
almost one-third of the citations of the literature review. The entire references section of the
paper only includes sixteen works. It should be noted that the research on technology coaches
is in its infancy so there are a limited number of directly related resources.

Dissertation Critique 1

The references included were current and included just one historical work related to

Blooms taxonomy. The references came from a variety of sources, all of which appear to be
well established and refereed journals. Few of the items in the literature review appeared to
be actual studies. Again, this may be attributed to the relative newness of the technology
coach position.

Much of the literature review revolves around general technology use by teachers and

includes several references that are only cursorily related to the topic of technology coaches.
There are no significant findings included in the literature review and no connection is made
between the effectiveness of technology coaches and other instructional coaches, an area that
one would expect more research to have been conducted.
Statement and significance of problem

The author clearly states the purpose of the study but does not necessarily identify the

problem. The purpose is described as determining if teachers use technology more effectively
and with more confidence before or after the integration of a technology coach. There is no
indication in the statement of the problem that teachers are in need of using technology more
effectively. One would expect the author to include some research that indicated that students
perform better when technology is fully integrated as well as evidence that instructional
coaches increase teachers confidence.

There are several limitations to this study and the author clearly articulates these

throughout the paper. The primary limitation is the small sample sixe. This study included a

Dissertation Critique 1

single high school and just twenty-five participants. While the study can still provide some
insight into teachers attitude towards technology coaches, no significant findings are present
that could be transferred to a larger population without significant further study. There were
no assumptions stated by the author.

The author stated several times that the results of the study would be important,

especially to the school district, in determining if the grant-funded position of technology coach
would be continued after the expiration of the grant. However, no mention was made as to the
importance of the study outside of this single school and district. Therefore, the study appears
to have little impact on the larger body of research related to school-level technology coaches
and the effect that they may have on teacher confidence.
Research Questions

The author identified three research questions in this study. First, the author asked,

What are the effects upon the confidence levels of teachers with regard to acquiring and using
technology skills, when a technology coach is used in the school? This question is clear and
relates directly to the purpose of the study. In short, the author is seeking to determine if
teachers are more confident when using technology in schools that have a technology coach.

The second research question stated, What specific strategies can be utilized by a

technology coach to bolster teacher confidence levels towards technology integration that is
embedded into the curriculum? This question is not as directly related to the purpose of the
study. The stated purpose of the study sought to determine if teachers used technology

Dissertation Critique 1

more efficiently and with more confidence. Determining the strategies that might improve this
would be of great benefit, however this research question was not addressed by the study.
There is no indication that the researcher actually surveyed participants regarding strategies.
There are no questions in the survey instrument related to how a technology coach worked
with the teachers, only if they worked with them and how it affected confidence. The author
cited two items from the survey instrument as addressing this question, however, I do not feel
that the survey item accurately reflects to content of the research question. Asking if the coach
gave the teacher more confidence or if the use of a coach was a better method of learning
technology does not provide information on strategies can be utilized by a technology coach.

The final research question articulated by the author asked, What effect does daily-

embedded professional development provided from a technology coach have on a teachers

technology performance skills? This question also raised concern as the instrument item that
was cited by the author only addresses whether the technology coach was helpful because it
was more personal and at a time when I needed to know. This could indicate that daily-
embedded activities were provided by the technology coach, but certainly does not assure
that it happened. I believe that additional survey items related to the frequency of professional
development provided by the technology coach are needed before this research question could
be properly addressed.
Procedures

Dissertation Critique 1

The dissertation was a based on a qualitative research study using a descriptive design.
The researcher used a set of archival survey results that had been previously conducted
by the participating school district. These results were then compared to a post-test
survey conducted by the researcher. This post-test survey was conducted at the end of
the first year of the technology coach being implemented into the school. The choice of
a qualitative design was appropriate, especially considering the small population. The
choice by the researcher to limit the study to one single school could easily be
questioned as short-sighted. Assumedly, there were ulterior goals, such as a program
evaluation of this particular effort rather than an overall examination of the efficacy of
technology coaches in general. The survey was only administered to twenty-five
teachers at the target school. The author acknowledges the limitation created by the
small population and recommends additional research of larger populations.

The survey used a series of questions with Likert-scale responses to evaluate

several aspects of teacher attitudes before and after one year with a technology coach
in place. As previously noted, several of these questions were identified as addressing
various aspects of the research questions even though the results do not seem to
accurately evaluate the premise of the question. For instance, the research attempts to
answer the question related to effective strategies for increasing teacher confidence
with a survey question that simply asks participants to rank if the experience of working
with a technology was better way to learn. The implication that the use of a

Dissertation Critique 1

technology coach was better does not provide any data on which methods might be
successful when the implementation is replicated.

The omission of the strategies used by the technology coach, and any

subsequent evaluation of their effectiveness is a great distraction to the value of this

work. The inclusion and evaluation of the strategies could have provided a baseline of
what works for technology coaches, and would have had incredible value as additional
implementations were established.

As written, the study provided only superficial data and basic analysis of that

data. The comparison of pre- and post-test data related to experience and comfort level
with a series of fourteen basic computer technology skills, and the alignment of these
changes with the demographic data, paints an interesting picture of the school, staff and
their progress over the year of the study. This data was reported as simple percentage
increases over the length of the study. The data was broken down by demographic
category; however, no in-depth analysis was completed.
Results, Conclusions and Implications

The researcher identified improvement in experience level in all but one of the fourteen

technology skills areas included in the study. Many subtopics, such a Desktop Computer Usage,
saw significant gains while other areas saw minimal increases. The results also show positive
teacher reaction to the presence of a technology coach in helpfulness, increase in skills
attributed to the technology coach, and that the technology coach was a better way to learn.

Dissertation Critique 1

The researcher concluded that the technology coach did provide a positive impact on

the integration of technology in classroom instruction. The data supports this conclusion, but
to varying degrees. The results indicate that for each of the research questions, a positive
impact was shown. It should be noted, however, the highest results bearly topped sixty
percent (The technology coach is a better way to learn. . . with 61.9% greatly agreeing.)

The results are expected although one would have expected the impact to be more

highly recognized by the participants in the study. Many factors could account for this including
the efficacy of the one particular technology coach involved. It is difficult to make many
generalizations fro the study. The previously discussed limitation of the population is evident,
but even more limiting is the fact that all of the data related to effectiveness of technology
coaches is in this case based upon the performance of a single coach for a single year.
Overall Evaluation
There are several positive factors identified by the study. However, these
improvements cannot be linked to the implementation of the technology coach. Had the
researcher included survey items that identified how much time the technology coach had
spent providing professional development to each teacher, a correlation between time and
increase in confidence and or skill levels could have been established. For example, teachers
that utilize the just in time training offered by a technology coach five or more times a month
show a higher percentage increase in confidence to implement technology would have been a
valuable finding.

Dissertation Critique 1

Overall the dissertation had several positive aspects. The study could be easily

replicated in any school that has or plans to implement technology coaches. The study, as
designed, could provide some valuable data to evaluate the perceived benefits of the
technology coach. The topic presented is an important one that will only require more research
in the coming years. However, that research should take a much more in-depth look at the
efficacy of technology coaches. It should examine more than just experience and confidence in
the technology skills of teachers. It should look to establish a link between effective, just-in-
time professional development presented by a technology coach that has worked to embed
technology into the core curriculum and an increase in teacher efficacy as a whole. It should
begin to make the connection between effective instructional technology coaches and
increases in student achievement.
Style
The dissertation did not stand out as one of the best writing examples on educational
technology. The paper included several repeated sentences that appeared almost exactly in
multiple places. The author seemed to have little flow in the literature review with several
topics seemingly placed randomly in the middle of other unrelated topics. Overall, the paper
simply seemed to have been rushed.