nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

09.03.2018

The impact of technology use and teacher professional development on U.S. national assessment of educational progress (NAEP) mathematics achievement

verfasst von: Byron Havard, Giang-Nguyen Nguyen, Barbara Otto

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 5/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of technology use and teacher professional development on students’ mathematics academic achievement. The U.S. Department of Education National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) published results for mathematics assessments for Grade 4 from the years 2005–2015 served as the dependent variable. Specific items related to technology use and professional development selected from both student and mathematics teacher questionnaires served as the independent variables. The Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) was used as a framework to guide this research. Data analyses revealed significant differences across multiple variables and multiple years.

Vorheriger Artikel RETRACTED ARTICLE: Acceptance and usage of a mobile information system services in University of Jordan

Nächster Artikel Students motivation for adopting programming contests: Innovation-diffusion perspective

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Bakker, M., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Robitzsch, A. (2015). Effects of playing mathematics computer games on primary school students' multiplicative reasoning ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 55–71.CrossRef

Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle kompetenz von lehrkräften [Teachers’ professional competence]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 9, 469–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2.CrossRef

Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2013). The COACTIV model of teachers’ professional competence. In M. Kunter et al. (eds.), Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers, mathematics teacher education 8 (pp. 25–48). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5149-5_2.

Bennison, A., & Goos, M. (2010). Learning to teach mathematics with technology: A survey of professional development needs, experiences and impacts. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 22(1), 31–56.CrossRef

Bouck, E. C., Joshi, G. S., & Johnson, L. (2013). Examining calculator use among students with and without disabilities educated with different mathematical curricula. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(3), 369–385.CrossRef

Briggs, S., & Crompton, H. (2016). Taking advantage of MOOCs in k-12 education: A blended approach. In D. Parsons (Ed.), Mobile and blended learning innovations for improved learning outcomes (pp. 297–309). Hershey: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0359-0.ch015.CrossRef

Campuzano, L., Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., & Rall, K. (2009). Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from two student cohorts. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.

Carr, J. M. (2012). Does math achievement h’app'en when ipads and game-based learning are incorporated into fifth-grade mathematics instruction? Journal of Information Technology Education, 11, 269–286.CrossRef

Cheung, A. C., & Slavin, R. E. (2013). Review: The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 988–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.001.

Dash, S., de Kramer, R. M., O'Dwyer, L. M., Masters, J., & Russell, M. (2012). Impact of online professional development on teacher quality and student achievement in fifth grade mathematics. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(1), 1–26.CrossRef

Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., Heaviside, S. N., Carey, N., Campuzano, L., Means, B., et al. (2007). Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from the first student cohort. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.

Ernest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15, 13–33.CrossRef

Goos, M., & Bennison, A. (2008). Surveying the technology landscape: Teachers’ use of technology in secondary mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(3), 102–130.CrossRef

Guskey, T. R. (2014). Planning professional learning. Educational Leadership, 71(8), 10.

Handal, B., Campbell, C., Cavanagh, M., Petocz, P., & Kelly, N. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1) Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol13/iss1/mathematics/article1.cfm.

Heid, M. K., & Blume, G. W. (2008). Algebra and function development. In M. K. Heid & G. W. Blume (Eds.), Research on technology and the teaching and learning of mathematics: Research syntheses (Vol. 1, pp. 55–108). Charlotte: Information Age.

Heintzelman, S. C. (2017). Integrating technology to engage students with EBD: A case study of school leader support. Theses and Dissertations - Education Science, 28 Retrieved from https://uknowledge.uky.edu/edsc_etds/28.

Herring, M. C., Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators (2nd edn.). New York: Routledge.

Hill, H. C., Beisiegel, M., & Jacob, R. (2013). Professional development research: Consensus, crossroads, and challenges. Educational Researcher, 42(9), 476–487.CrossRef

Horn, M. B., & Mackey, K. (2011). Transforming American education. E-Learning and Digital Media, 8(2), 133–144.CrossRef

Kennedy, M. (2010). Connecting to the future. American School & University, 82(9), 14–21.

Kim, S., & Chang, M. (2010). Computer games for the math achievement of diverse students. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 224–232.

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1) Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/general/article1.cfm.

Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740–762.CrossRef

Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805–820.CrossRef

Lee, Y.-H., Waxman, H., Wu, J.-Y., Michko, G., & Lin, G. (2013). Revisit the effect of teaching and learning with technology. Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 133–146.

Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9125-8.CrossRef

Means, B. (2010). Technology and education change: Focus on student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 285–307.CrossRef

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRef

National Assessment Governing Board. (2007). Assessment and item specifications for the NAEP 2009 mathematics assessment. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

National Assessment Governing Board. (2012). Mathematics framework for the 2013 national assessment of educational progress. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). National assessment of educational progress: The nation’s report card: Mathematics 2005 (NCES 2006–453). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Mathematics 2007: National assessment of educational progress at grades 4 and 8 (NCES 2007–494). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Mathematics 2009: National assessment of educational progress at grades 4 and 8 (NCES 2010–451). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics (2011, March 25). NAEP Assessment Sample Design. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/tdw/sample_design/

National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Mathematics 2011: National assessment of educational progress at grades 4 and 8 (NCES 2012–458). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). The nation's report card: A first look--2013 mathematics and reading (NCES 2013–456). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics (2014). NAEP scoring. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/tdw/scoring/

National Center for Education Statistics. (2015a). The condition of education 2015 (NCES 2015–144). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics (2015b). About the 2015 mathematics assessment. Retrieved from https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2015/#mathematics/about

National Center for Education Statistics (2015c). Questionnaires for students, teachers, and schools. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/bgquest.aspx.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2016a). The condition of education 2016 (NCES 2016–144). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics (2016b). NAEP data explorer [Data file]. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/dataset.aspx

National Center for Education Statistics (2017). Frequently asked questions about NAEP survey questionnaires. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/bgquest_faq.aspx. Accessed 08 Feb 2017.

O'Neal, L. J., Gibson, P., & Cotten, S. R. (2017). Elementary school teachers' beliefs about the role of technology in 21st-century teaching and learning. Computers in the Schools, 34(3), 192–206.CrossRef

Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development [OECD] (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. Programme for International Student Assessment, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en.

Polly, D. (2008). Modeling the influence of calculator use and teacher effects on first grade students' mathematics achievement. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 27(3), 245–263.

Polly, D. (2011). Developing teachers' technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) through mathematics professional development. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 18(2), 83–95.

Roberts, D. M. (1980). The impact of electronic calculators on educational performance. Review of Educational Research, 50(1), 71–98.CrossRef

Roschelle, R., Shechtman, N., Tatar, D., Hegedus, S., Hopkins, B., Empson, S., Knudsen, J., & Gallagher, L. P. (2010). Integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics: Three large-scale studies. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 833–878.CrossRef

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: A conception of teacher knowledge. American Educator, 10(1), 9–15.

Spencer, J. T. (2014). PD isn't the problem. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(7), 74–75.CrossRef

Thompson, A. D., & Sproule, S. L. (2000). Deciding when to use calculators. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 6(2), 126.

Tienken, C. H., & Wilson, M. J. (2007). The impact of computer assisted instruction on seventh-grade students' mathematics achievement. Planning and Changing, 38(3), 181–190.

Utterberg, M., Lundin, J., & Lindström, B. (2017). Conditions influencing mathematics teachers´ uptake of digital tools – a systematic literature review. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2016–2029). Austin: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/177494/.

Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Williams, J. M. B. (2007). Elementary and middle school mathematics. Teaching development. Boston: Pearson.

Walcott, C., & Stickles, P. R. (2012). Calculator use on NAEP: A look at fourth- and eighth-grade mathematics achievement. School Science and Mathematics, 112(4), 241–254.CrossRef

Yurdakul, I. K., Odabasi, H. F., Kilicer, K., Coklar, A. N., Birinci, G., & Kurt, A. A. (2012). The development, validity and reliability of TPACK-deep: A technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. Computers & Education, 58(3), 964–977.CrossRef

Titel: The impact of technology use and teacher professional development on U.S. national assessment of educational progress (NAEP) mathematics achievement
verfasst von: Byron Havard
Giang-Nguyen Nguyen
Barbara Otto
Publikationsdatum: 09.03.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 5/2018
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9696-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2018

Browsing the internet to solve information problems: A study of students’ search actions and behaviours using a ‘think aloud’ protocol

Classroom dialogue and digital technologies: A scoping review

A secure cloud framework to share EHRs using modified CP-ABE and the attribute bloom filter

Learning online, offline, and in-between: comparing student academic outcomes and course satisfaction in face-to-face, online, and blended teaching modalities

Social media networks and pedagogy at the University of Jordan

Predictors of portable technology adoption intentions to support elementary children reading

Premium Partner