Walden University

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

This is to certify that the doctoral study by

Annette Durbin

W
has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects,
and that any and all revisions required by
IE
the review committee have been made.

Review Committee
EV
Dr. Leslie Jones, Committee Chairperson, Education Faculty
Dr. Joe Ann Hinrichs, Committee Member, Education Faculty
Dr. Jeanne Iorio, University Reviewer, Education Faculty
PR

Chief Academic Officer

Eric Riedel, Ph.D.

Walden University
2013
 Abstract

K – 8 Teachers Using Mobile Technology as a

Student Centered Instructional Tool

by

Annette L. Durbin

MA, Walden University, 2009

BS, Wilmington College, 1993

W
IE
Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
EV
of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Education

Administrative Leadership for Teaching and Learning

PR

Walden University

October 2013
 Abstract

Mobile technology is increasing its presence in the educational environment. The public

school district in this study has made great strides improving technology usage in schools

with updated hardware, extensive district-wide infrastructure, a technology plan, and

professional development. While the district has been successful in some areas, like

others across the nation, the challenges educators face in the classroom continue to have a

negative impact on the end results this district seeks: 100% technology implementation.

The current study focused on a local charter school whose practices were grounded in the

W
conceptual framework of experiential learning, social interdependence, and multiple

intelligences using mobile technology. The purpose of this study was to understand the
IE
pedagogies, practices, and attitudes among K-8 charter school educators on the mobile
EV
technology used as a student-centered instructional tool. A qualitative, multiple case

study design was used to gather and analyze data from interviews, a focus learning group,

and instructional observations of 6 K-8 charter school teachers. Data were analyzed
PR

using a constant comparative method to identify common trends and themes. Results

showed how these teachers transitioned from traditional pedagogy to 21st century

pedagogy. Trends included learning opportunities; technology implementation strategies;

motivation; and challenges encountered that impacted pedagogy, practice and attitude. A

tech lab project study was designed to support educator transitioning to 21st century

pedagogy. These findings show that professional development and professional learning

communities can be used to overcome challenges and support teachers using mobile

technology as a student-centered instructional tool, one that aids a successful transition.

PR
EV
IE
W
 K – 8 Teachers Using Mobile Technology as a

Student Centered Instructional Tool

by

Annette L. Durbin

MA, Walden University, 2009

W
BS, Wilmington College, 1993

IE
Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of

EV
Doctor of Education

Administrative Leadership for Teaching and Learning

PR

Walden University

October 2013
 UMI Number: 3601548

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

W
IE
UMI 3601548
EV
Published by ProQuest LLC (2013). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
PR

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
 Dedication

This doctoral study is dedicated to my loving husband, Patrick Durbin, and our

wonderful children, Nathan, Nicholas, Lindsay, and Timothy. My husband and children

have been my cheerleaders along this educational journey and a source of daily

inspiration to make a difference in teaching and learning. Patrick has spent countless

hours reading and discussing my manuscripts, providing his thoughtful perspectives, and

ensuring the house and family events operated smoothly while I worked on my study.

Without my family’s love, support, and inspiration, my goal would not be realized.

W
IE
EV
PR
 Acknowledgments

This educational journey and achievement has been one that sits on the shoulders

of an outstanding support network. I could not have anticipated the amount of support

that each provided as I spent endless hours on this doctoral study. I am truly grateful for

the support that each person has provided me on this academic quest.

I am grateful to have such a fantastic doctoral committee. My committee

provided countless hours of support throughout this journey. I could not have been this

successful without their timely feedback, encouraging words, and insightful direction.

W
The expertise Dr. Leslie Jones shared was invaluable. Her holistic viewpoint helped me

to hone my initial study ideas and organize my work through each step of this journey.
IE
Dr. JoeAnn Hinrichs also provided targeted comments that helped me tighten up my
EV
ideas so they were conveyed in a clear and concise manner. I appreciated their

viewpoints, constructive comments, and unending support throughout this process.

I am grateful for my parents, Irvin Walter (deceased) and Maria Walter. My

PR

parents provided me a foundation for learning and always inspired me to achieve my

dreams. They never doubted for a minute that I would not achieve my academic goals.

The support my family provided me throughout this process is invaluable. My

husband managed to keep the house in order and meals prepared while I spent countless

hours reading and typing. My children were forgiving of the missed opportunities to

partake in a school event. Their understanding while I embarked on this project is

heartfelt. I cannot express how grateful I am for the love and understanding my family

provided during this journey to achieve my goal.

 Table of Contents

List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... vi

List of Figures.................................................................................................................... vii

Section 1: The Problem ....................................................................................................... 1

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

Definition of the Problem .............................................................................................. 3

The Local Problem ........................................................................................................ 5

Rationale ........................................................................................................................ 7

W
Evidence of the Problem at the Local Level ........................................................... 7

Evidence of the Problem from the Professional Literature ..................................... 9

IE
Definitions ................................................................................................................... 15

EV
Significance ................................................................................................................. 16

Research Purpose......................................................................................................... 17

Research Question ....................................................................................................... 17

PR

Review of the Literature .............................................................................................. 19

Conceptual Framework ......................................................................................... 19

The Millennial Generation .................................................................................... 22

Shifting to Mobile Learning .................................................................................. 25

Mobile Learning Studies ....................................................................................... 27

The United States’ Challenges .............................................................................. 31

Implications ................................................................................................................. 33

Summary...................................................................................................................... 34

i
Section 2: The Methodology ............................................................................................. 36

Introduction ................................................................................................................. 36

Research Design and Approach................................................................................... 37

Justification of Case Study Design .............................................................................. 38

Participants and Sample .............................................................................................. 41

Informed Consent and Ethical Considerations ............................................................ 43

Permission to Obtain Data ........................................................................................... 44

Initial Study Presentation ............................................................................................ 44

W
Saturation and Redundancy ......................................................................................... 45

Researcher’s Role ........................................................................................................ 45

IE
Research Question ....................................................................................................... 46

EV
Data Collection Procedure ........................................................................................... 46

Validity in Data Collection Tools.......................................................................... 47

Reliability in Data Collection Procedures ............................................................. 48

PR

Data Collection in Process........................................................................................... 49

Focus Group Interview .......................................................................................... 49

First Semistructured Interview .............................................................................. 54

Instructional Observation ...................................................................................... 58

Follow up Interview .............................................................................................. 63

Data Security ............................................................................................................... 68

Assumptions ................................................................................................................ 69

Limitations ................................................................................................................... 70

ii
Delimitations ............................................................................................................... 71

Data Analysis and Interpretation ................................................................................. 71

Validity and Reliability ............................................................................................... 72

Member Checking ................................................................................................. 72

Comparative Analysis ........................................................................................... 73

Peer Debrief ........................................................................................................... 75

Audit Trial ............................................................................................................. 75

Qualitative Findings: Comparative Analysis from Categories to Themes ................. 76

W
Pedagogy ............................................................................................................... 76

Practice .................................................................................................................. 80

IE
Attitude .................................................................................................................. 82

EV
Data Presentation Strategy .......................................................................................... 82

Project Study Rationale ............................................................................................... 84

Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 85

PR

Introduction ................................................................................................................. 88

Description and Goals ................................................................................................. 90

Rationale ...................................................................................................................... 93

Review of the Literature .............................................................................................. 96

The National Writing Project ................................................................................ 97

The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards .................................. 101

Implementation .......................................................................................................... 109

Potential Resources and Existing Supports ......................................................... 110

iii
 Potential Barriers ................................................................................................. 111

Proposal for Implementation and Timetable ....................................................... 115

Roles and Responsibilities of Student and Others ............................................... 116

Project Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 118

Implications Including Social Change....................................................................... 119

Local Community ................................................................................................ 119

Far-Reaching ....................................................................................................... 119

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 120

W
Section 4: Reflections and Conclusion ............................................................................ 122

Introduction ............................................................................................................... 122

IE
Project Strengths ........................................................................................................ 122

EV
Recommendations for Remediation of Limitations .................................................. 123

Scholarship ................................................................................................................ 125

Project Development and Evaluation ........................................................................ 128

PR

Leadership and Change ............................................................................................. 129

Analysis of Self as Scholar ........................................................................................ 130

Analysis of Self as Practitioner ................................................................................. 131

Analysis of Self as Project Developer ....................................................................... 131

The Project’s Potential Impact on Social Change ..................................................... 132

Implications, Applications, and Directions for Future Research .............................. 133

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 135

References ....................................................................................................................... 137

iv
Appendix A: Technology Lab Professional Development Project Study ....................... 148

Appendix B: Focus Learning Group Questions ............................................................. 153

Appendix C: First Interview Questions .......................................................................... 155

Appendix D: Observation Guide .................................................................................... 158

Appendix E: Second Semi-Structured Interview Questions .......................................... 166

Appendix F: Protecting Human Subject Research Participant Certificate of

Completion .......................................................................................................... 169

Curriculum Vitae ............................................................................................................. 170

W
IE
EV
PR

v
 List of Tables

Table 1. Traditional Pedagogy vs. 21st Century Pedagogy………….……………..……..2

Table 2. Barriers That Impede Educator Technology Implementation………................24

Table 3. Characteristic of Teacher Participants – Maximum Variation………………...42

Table 4. Data Collected: Developing Themes in Pedagogy, Practice, and Attitude…...74

Table 5. Comparison: 21st Century Pedagogy vs. Charter School

Pedagogy.............................................................................................................77

Table 6. Teachers share advice about using mobile technology..…………………..…...81

W
Table 7. Effective Professional Development Principles Aligned

with “Technology Lab”……………….....................………………………...105

IE
EV
PR

vi
 List of Figures

Figure 1. Tech Lab Professional Development ............................................................... 108

W
IE
EV
PR

vii
 1

Section 1: The Problem

Introduction

As a country in a global society, the United States is the largest and most

technologically powerful economy in the world (Central Intelligence Agency, 2012), yet

ranks below the international average in literacy and math development (National Center

for Educational Statistics, 2012). Utilizing technological opportunities as a resource to

promote student learning is a tool that can be inexpensive and have the potential to

W
provide a variety of personalized learning options that can affect increased student

learning, achievement, and meet stakeholder expectations to prepare students for college

and career ready professions.

IE
This 8 week, qualitative, multiple case project study investigated how one charter
EV
school in the Matanuska Susitna Borough School District (MSBSD) in Alaska has taken

steps to make a pedagogical paradigm shift concerning teaching and learning. Moving
PR

from traditional learning pedagogy indicators to 21st century learning pedagogy indicators

as outlined in Table 1, this school was the first pioneering school in the district to embark

on millennium learning opportunities. This charter school utilized mobile technology to

provide a purposeful learning environment to promote student learning and achievement.

 2

Table 1

Traditional Pedagogy vs. 21st Century Pedagogy

Traditional Pedagogy 21st Century Pedagogy

1. Seat time measures of educational
attainment
2. Organize students into
predetermined groups
3. Structure separate academic
Provide coursework via technology allows
students flexible pacing (DiPietro, Ferdig,
Black, & Preston, 2010)
Detracking students (LaPrade, 2011)
Provide multiple pathways for learning

W
disciplines (Wilson, Stemp, & McGinty, 2011)
4. Organize learning into classes of Blended learning opportunities (Sethy,
roughly equal size with all the
students in a particular class
IE 2008)

receiving the same content at the

EV
same pace.
5. Keep these groups in place all year Multiage grouping (Torrance, 2012)
(USDOE, 2010, p. xiv)
PR

This project study examined mobile technological pedagogy, practice, and

attitude of K–8 educators. The educators at this school utilized laptop computers and

iPads on a daily basis to provide instruction that was individualized and meaningful for

students. Although these educators continue to learn and apply effective instructional

strategies and methods to implement mobile technology into a learning environment, this

project study takes the educator’s instructional craft to a new level by exploring and

understanding the educators’ learning process during this pedagogical transition.

Participants also shared challenges, successes, and advice for educators who want to
 3

provide a technologically rich, personalized, differentiated instructional learning

environment in a whole group class setting. Building upon the knowledge learned

through the data analysis, the project for this study (see Appendix A) provided a “how to”

model for others interested in using mobile technology. As a result, this project study

provided a picturesque opportunity for educators locally, nationally, and globally,

essentially a roadmap for successful mobile technological implementation.

In Section 1, I provide background information of the problem at the local level

W
with linkage to the national level. By establishing this connection, it became evident this

problem was significant, and left unsolved, could have a detrimental impact on the
IE
United State’s (U.S.) educational system and civilized society. As Darling-Hammond

(2010) found, “The United States must shift course if it is to survive and prosper as a
EV
First World nation in the 21st century” (p. 25). This local problem is echoed in the

literature review that also provided some background and direction to overcome the
PR

technological challenges. Using this information and the study results as a foundation,

coupled with adult learning theories, successful organization work, and the impact of

professional learning communities, the project for this study evolved. Finally, a

discussion regarding the significance of this problem that included professional

application and resulted in positive social change became the end goal for this project

study.

Definition of the Problem

Peters (2007) stated “the distinguishing feature of our society at the beginning of

the 21st century is the rapid rate of technological and social change” (p. 1). The work of
 4

the school system has changed from preparing students for an industrialized nation with a

sense of patriotism, to one that is globalized. Darling-Hammond confirms, “At least 70%

of U.S jobs now require specialized knowledge and skills, as compared to only 5% at the

dawn of the last century, when our current system of schooling was established” (2010, p.

2). Coupled with this technological and social change, amongst a litany of other

challenges (Marx, 2006, p. 2) it was no secret that districts nationwide were experiencing

a decrease in funding and an increase in expenses and stakeholder expectations.

W
Marx (2006) further identified societal trends where a technological emphasis

effects education. Although Marx shared 16 futuristic trends (pp. 48–49), five education

related futuristic trends included:

IE
1. Standards and high-stakes tests will fuel a demand for personalization in an
EV
education system increasingly committed to lifelong development;

2. Pressure will grow for society to prepare people for jobs and careers that may not
PR

currently exist;

3. Technology will increase the speed of communication and the pace of

advancement or decline;

4. Competition will increase to attract and keep qualified educators;

5. Great numbers of people will seek personal meaning in their lives in response to

an intense, high-tech, always-on, fast-moving society. (pp. 48-49)

While each of these trends provided insight into the future of education, educators may

be ignoring these societal changes.

Educational challenges were further echoed in the National Education

 5

Technology Plan 2010 (U.S. Department of Education [USDOE], 2010). To support

districts nationwide using technology as a tool to overcome obstacles, “promote student

achievement and preparation for global competitiveness” (p. 124), the National

Education Technology Plan 2010 identified five key areas (Learning, Assessment,

Teaching, Infrastructure, and Productivity) to support technological integration in the

education sector. Focusing on learning, assessment, and teaching, the plan called for

educators, leaders, and policymakers to refocus and rethink the basic pedagogical

W
assumptions that have paved the path in education for the past century.

Dating back to the beginning of the educational system in America, these

IE
traditional pedagogical assumptions have proven to be ineffective for today’s learners to

be globally progressive. As more educational research shared how millennial students

EV
learn (Dyson, Litchfield, Raban, & Leijdekkers, 2009; Herrington & Herrington, 2007;

Murray & Olcese, 2011), educators need to make a paradigm shift from traditional
PR

pedagogical practices to overcome the challenges and barriers that face education today

in order to prepare students for future careers.

The Local Problem

On March 23, 2011, The MSBSD adopted an Educational Technology and

Telecommunications Service Plan (2012). Specifically the plan has four goals:

1. Technology is being used to improve student success, achievement, and

performance, and to focus on the student’s career and college readiness;

2. Technology is being used to increase the graduation rate;

3. Technology is welcoming families to participate in their children’s education;

 6

4. Technology is being used to create and maintain a safe and healthy environment

for our students and staff. (MSBSD, 2012, p. 3)

This plan aligned with the National Education Technology Plan 2010 focusing

on the specific point, “applying the advanced technologies used in our daily personal and

professional lives to our entire education system to improve student learning” (USDOE,

2010, p. 3). It was evident the local school district was working to open technology

usage within the community and realized the importance of this task. In order to obtain

W
this objective, the district has provided funding opportunities for schools to purchase

hardware and software to support this school board’s goals. Since 2011, the district has

improved instruction by:

IE
• supporting learning technologies in the classroom to include whiteboards,
EV
multimedia projects and learning software;

• implementing a wireless access infrastructure to accommodate mobile learning

PR

devices; increasing professional development to maintain student-centered

pedagogies;

• implementing information and technology literacy standards that are aligned to

the International Science, Technology, and Education Standards (International

Society for Education in Technology, 2012) that focus on 21st century learning

skills;

• continuing to expand learning opportunities outside the classroom by purchasing

online learning licenses through a variety of vendors (MSBSD, 2012, pp. 3-4).

The MSBSD has adopted an Educational Technology and Telecommunications

 7

Service Plan for using technology, including mobile technology, as a tool to meet the

school board’s goal to improve student success, achievement, and performance.

However, the school district has not taken the opportunity to investigate teachers’

pedagogy, practice, and attitude using mobile technology as a student centered

instructional strategy to meet the school board’s goals. There was a lack of

understanding about K-8 teachers’ instructional platform regarding mobile technology

usage as a student-centered instructional tool. Therefore, K-8 teachers in a central district

W
charter school located in Alaska experience a technological literacy gap.

Rationale
IE
Evidence of the Problem at the Local Level

Although the district has made great strides increasing technology availability, it
EV
still recognized “many teachers are not prepared to include online learning as part of their

teaching strategies” (MSBSD, 2012, p. 10). This acknowledgment aligned with the
PR

literature review that detailed several barriers preventing educators from integrating

technology as an instructional tool. This district’s conclusion was identified through a

2011 Needs Assessment of Mat Su Staff detailing that:

Eighty-five percent of responding teachers were somewhat familiar or not at all

familiar with the National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for

students. Only 14% were very familiar with the NETS for students. Fifty-four

percent were not familiar with the 21st century skills, and 49% do not actively

maintain their teacher website. Only 11% believe that social networking sites can

be useful as educational tools. (MSBSD, 2012, p. 10)

 8

As a result of these findings and the school board’s goals, the district realized these

technology improvements would be meaningless unless “teacher pedagogy, practice, and

attitudes” were changed (MSBSD, 2012, p. 11).

Although the district acknowledged technology as an important tool for increasing

student learning, achievement, and preparing students with the skills necessary to

participate in a global community, additional work outside and inside the classroom was

needed. Through infrastructure technology updates outside the classroom, the district

W
continued working toward a “bring your own tech device” learning model that

accommodates personal mobile technology devices for staff and students. Therefore, this
IE
model provided the opportunity for teachers to engage students in mobile learning.

However, in order to effect positive change inside the classroom, the teachers need to be
EV
open to design lessons with mobile technology, thus engaging students in mobile

learning. As noted by research in professional literature (Aubusson, Schuck, & Burden,

PR

2009; Dyson et al., 2009; Keengwe, Onchwari, & Wachira, 2008; Koc & Bakir, 2010;

Peters, 2007; Rogers & Wallace, 2011; Smith & Owens, 2010), overcoming barriers to

implement technology as an instructional tool was not only a MSBSD problem, but also a

nationwide problem.

Furthermore, in order to meet the MSBSD’s Educational Technology and

Telecommunications Service Plan (MSBSD, 2012) goal “technology is being used to

improve student success, achievement, and performance” (p. 3), it was evident that

teachers in the MSBSD needed to engage in technological opportunities to support their

knowledge, understanding, and usage of technology. Currently, the MSBSD has

 9

provided professional development through a how to use technology device, program

workshop, or one day event, but has not provided ongoing support with technology

implementation as an instructional tool in the classroom. Therefore, teachers have not

had the opportunity to understand how to effectively use technology as an instructional

tool. In order to overcome this challenge, understanding teachers’ current technological

pedagogy, practice, and attitude is crucial to the success of the Educational Technology

and Telecommunications Service Plan (MSBSD, 2012). As a result of engagement in

W
educator technological learning experiences, student learning and achievement will most

likely increase as noted by research in professional literature (American Institutes for

IE
Research, 2012; Dyson et al., 2009; Keengwe et al., 2008; USDOE, 2004); therefore,

meeting the MSBSD Educational Technology and Telecommunications Service Plan

EV
goals (2012).

Evidence of the Problem from the Professional Literature

PR

Technology has been a tool gaining diverse usage in a variety of sectors for

various reasons. From entertainment, business, health, military, and government usage,

technology has played an expanding role in the United State’s way of life (Camlek, 2011;

Ferenchick, Fetters, & Carse, 2008; Korkmaz, Lee, & Park, 2011). In the 1990s, the

World Wide Web opened up learning opportunities for students, expanded business

operations and communications, and provided global connectedness. At the dawn of the

21st century, technology continued to maintain a presence in everyday lives of citizens,

whether for personal or professional needs (Edwards, Tracy, & Jordan, 2011). Simply

stated, technology has had an increasing presence and value in daily functionality of