- Email: [email protected]
Some factors affecting elementary teachers' use of the computer
Computers E&c. Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 301-309, Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
SOME
FACTORS
University,
Copyright
AFFECTING ELEMENTARY USE OF THE COMPUTER
CYNTHIA Friends
1992
WINNANS
Division (Received
and
of Education, 14 May
DEBORAH
SARDO
2100 University,
0360-1315/92 %5.00+0.00 1992 Pergamon Press Ltd
TEACHERS’
BROWN
Wichita,
1991; revised 9 September
0
KS 67213, U.S.A.
1991)
Abstract-A survey of 70 fourth and fifth grade elementary teachers revealed several interesting factors, not documented elsewhere, that affect teachers’ use of the computer. First, very few teachers themselves owned computers or used them for personal reasons at home or school. Second, most teachers felt that neither they nor the students should be held accountable for the teaching or learning of computer objectives. Third, teachers were perplexed as to how to manage students who were not able to take their turn on the computer. Fourth, several teachers chose not to use district-provided sources written to help them implement the computer. Fifth, most teachers had little understanding of the scope and sequence of the district’s computer curriculum and how their grade level fit into this. Sixth, most teachers felt that they were allotted too little time to teach computers each week.
INTRODUCTION
The introduction of computers into our society has been met with differing views. It has been found that in the general population relatively younger males, of higher education and income have the most favourable predispositions in regard to the computer[l]. In another recent study educational level was even more likely to have an effect on one’s attitudes toward computers than age. Those who were better educated, whether young or old, were more favorably disposed to rapid advances in technology [2]. Teachers’ attitudes toward computers have also been studied. In one study conducted in 1979 almost one-third of the teachers interviewed felt that computers in education were a passing fancy; yet when the survey was conducted again in 1982, it was found that 80% of teachers surveyed believed microcomputers in education were not a fad and predicted they would have a drastic impact on education. But while the number of microcomputers had risen dramatically, the percentages of teachers actually using microcomputers in 1982 remained at or below 1% [3]. One of the reasons for such low usage may be that the push for computers in schools did not come from within the schools, but from upper-middle-class parents convinced that computers were destined to play a very important role in the workplace[4]. Although upper-middle-class parents felt a right to then be involved in the implementation, often teachers lacked the experience and expertise needed. Among the problems affecting computer instruction in schools have included a lack of trained teachers who acquired knowledge of computers during teacher training, scarce resources which prevented having enough equipment and supplies for full utilization, and few “model” programs to guide educational planners[5]. At this rate, it appears that students may quickly outdistance teachers in their acquisition of competence. Students currently are being given opportunities for regular, systematic instruction while studies indicate that most teachers do not have continuing instruction beyond inservice workshops[6]. Many computer professionals are either partly or mostly self-taught [7]. One recent study, conducted in a school system which had an all-grade, mandated program of computer instruction that had been in place for almost 2 years, found that teachers indicated significantly less confidence in their ability to use computers than students did[8]. In general, children show an eagerness to use computers. One advantage cited for using computers with children is that computers are intrinsically motivating to children the same way that video games are [9]. Because of the relatively recent introduction of computers into the elementary curriculum, there appears to be little research done on the extent to which teachers use computers with their classes and the factors influencing a teacher’s choice about whether or not to use computers. Although CAE 1814-D
302
CYNTHIAWINNANS and DEBORAHSARLXIBROWN
computer literacy objectives for all grade levels have been put in place in many districts, some teachers are choosing not to teach the stated objectives at the elementary level. In no other subject area would such a situation be tolerated[lO]. Several recent studies have examined what steps need to be taken school-wide to remedy this situation. A study in a borough of outer London determined that four items need to be identified and addressed in order to insure proper implementation of computers in schools[l 11. These are as follows: (1) a need and relevance of the change, (2) the clarity of its uses, (3) the complexity and extendibility of its uses and (4) the quality and practicality of the program. In contrast, a recent survey of principals cited teachers’ resistance, fear, anxiety and apathy as major obstacles to implementation, second only to the lack of financial resources[l2]. Teachers in the same study cited the lack of adequate software and the inability to see how computers benefit children in their classes as their main concerns with regard to implementation. Several variables were studied including age, experience, education, class size, teachers’ level of literacy, types of computers, time of acquisition, and the local socio-economic status. However, it was concluded that only teachers’ attitudes were significantly related to implementation. Most research on the use of computers in schools has been quantitative, utilizing experimental and survey research methods, although there is new interest in case study, ethnographic and other qualitative approaches. Some studies are beginning to address the role of the teacher in determining learning effects from computer applications. However, two recent meta-analyses reviewed few such examples [ 131. One such recent study examined the influences on computer use in three leading lower secondary schools in The Netherlands[l4]. Using case study and survey methods it was found that these schools had hardly passed the grassroots stage of development. Major factors cited by teachers for this included the following: a lack of hardware and software, too little support from school administration, too little external support, too few computer-using teachers, and a lack of inservice training facilities. More studies such as the one by Plomp et al. [14], need to be conducted in the elementary grades. While Plomp’s study is noteworthy, the issue of generalizability to other countries needs to be addressed through conducting research in a variety of context and locations. Also, as Becker notes, “Most of the studies reviewed, flawed and unflawed, have to do with maths, reading and language arts in the upper elementary grades, but that even if all of them were considered to be without damning flaws, together they do not come close to providing prescriptive data for deciding whether and how to use computers as adjuncts for instruction in these subjects.” Additionally, the whole instructional realm is different than just a few years ago. Word processing now accounts for 15% of all computer instruction, but was non-existent in the earlier studies. Becker feels that we need a new model of research in order to build a knowledge base that will tell us under what conditions and circumstances we can expect computers to be effective[l5]. Teachers are those who control the content of the lessons, yet their attitudes toward teaching computers to elementary students have rarely been investigated. In addition, few studies have been done to investigate elementary teachers’ perceptions of the factors which may constrain their use of computers. RESEARCH
QUESTIONS
This study surveyed fourth and fifth grade teachers in an attempt to discern the following: teachers’ educational background and comfort level with regard to computers, teachers’ perceptions about how computer implementation could be improved, teachers’ knowledge of the computer curriculum, sources used in planning computer instruction, and teachers’ attitudes with regard to accountability issues. Such information should provide insight into why teachers plan the way they do for computer instruction. RESEARCH
DESIGN
Description of district and the elementary computer curriculum
The district under study was a large, urban district located in a mid-western state which employed approx. 450 elementary teachers. The district’s elementary computer literacy plan was defined by
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer
303
listing activities for each district objective on task cards; both the district’s list of objectives and task cards were distributed to classroom teachers. In addition, a list of essential computer skills was given to teachers; 10 essential skills were listed for grades 3, 4 and 5. An Appendix to this list of skills was included with suggested approved software to facilitate instruction in these skills. However, no time frame or specific instructional guidelines were given to teachers. The central office administration believed that those teachers who had completed university credit courses such as “Microcomputers in the Classroom” and “Elementary School Keyboarding” should be able to devise their own instructional plans. Keyboarding was to be presented in third grade and reviewed and reinforced in grades four and five. Word processing was also to be introduced in grades four and five, as well as an introduction of graphics using a prepared disk and/or peripheral graphic devices. Fourth and fifth grade teachers were expected to reinforce keyboarding skills taught in the third grade. This progression was to continue until the sixth grade when, according to the middle school design, all students were required to take a well defined 6-week computer science course. Elementary teachers were allotted 30 min per week to teach computers. Teachers were not required to assign any grade to students in this area. Teachers could request help from the colleague in their building assigned the role of computer contact person or troubleshooter. Method For this study, surveys were sent to the 151 fourth and fifth grade teachers who taught in one large, urban school district. Fourth and fifth grade teachers were surveyed because they play such a vital role in linking computer skills attained in the third grade to those addressed at the middle school level. Questionnaires were mailed to the homes of each of the teachers (see Appendix). A cover letter accompanied the questionnaire, assuring confidentiality of responses and explaining that no follow-up of responses was planned, thereby making it essential that all surveys be completed within the allotted time period of 2 weeks. It was felt that by explaining that there could be no tracing of replies to the individual respondent, teachers would be more honest. The questionnaire was designed with a combination of open-ended and closed-ended questions using a Likert-type scale; it was plotted with the cooperation of a smaller group of classroom teachers drawn from grades two and three. Following this pilot certain questions were rewritten for clarification. Results of the questionnaire were recorded by tallying responses to the closedended questions while open-ended responses were examined to identify similar patterns. Overall percentages were tabulated; a majority of responses in a given category was interpreted to indicate the predominant attitudes of teachers affecting their use of computers with classes. RESULTS Of the 151 questionnaires mailed there were 70 replies, resulting in a response rate of 47%. In an attempt to gain an overall view of the sample population, personal data were collected which included gender, age, years of teaching experience, hours spent using a computer at home and at school, and perceived level of computer expertise. Of the 70 respondents, 79% were female and 21% were male. The ages of the teachers responding to the survey were dispersed fairly evenly. However, there was a higher response rate from persons at the two extremes of the scale, those with 10 or fewer years of experience and those with more than 25 years (see Table 1). Although the 47% response rate may have skewed the results, it should Table 1. Background of respondents Age range
Percent of total
Years of teaching experience
Percent of total
Under 25 26-30 31-35 3G40 41-45 46-50 over 50
II 13 II 16 14 16 19
l-5 6-10 II-15 16-20 21-25 over 35
24 20 19 II 10 16
304
CYNTHIA WINNANS and DEBORAH SARDO BROWN
be noted that the characteristics of the respondents with regard to sex, age, and years of experience closely matched the description provided by the district of all 151 fourth and fifth grade teachers. The results are presented with regard to the following aspects of computer instruction: teachers’ educational background and comfort level with regard to computer instruction, perceptions about how computer instruction could be improved, teachers’ knowledge of the computer curriculum, sources used in planning lessons for the computer, and teachers’ views on accountability in the area of computer education. Teachers’ background and comfort level
All fourth and fifth grade teachers surveyed reported having access to computers at school; 26% also reported owning a computer at home. Even though computers were available at school, 81% of all respondents reported using a computer at school less than 2 h per week. Of the 26% who owned a computer at home, 72% reported that they used it less than 2 h per week. It appears that teachers are not using computers to a great extent, even though computers are currently available. However, the majority of these teachers seemed to understand the importance of implementing computers in elementary schools. When asked to classify the most important reason for implementing computers, 70% responded that it provides preparation for the future. Additionally, 56% responded that they felt computers to be extremely important in today’s society. Although 82% of the teachers reported having had in-service training on computers and 77% reported having taken computer classes for college credit, only 21% rated their level of expertise as above average or high while nearly three-quarters of respondents rated this as average or below average. These answers seem to reflect little self-efficacy on the part of teachers with regard to computer expertise; despite taking formalized courses, including both in-service training and courses for college credit, teachers also reported rarely utilizing the computer for personal reasons. Of the 77% reporting that they received college credit in educational computing, a majority (62%) received 3 h or less of credit. Perhaps the reason for teachers’ relatively low ratings given to their own computer expertise lies in the fact that in-service training rarely was very extensive. Teachers’ perceptions about how computer implementation could be improved
When provided with a list of needs that could be addressed in order to help teachers implement computers, in-service training received the lowest ranking of the choices listed (see Table 2). It was interesting to note that while prior in-service training may not be meeting their present needs, these teachers did not perceive a need for improved in-service training. Instead, teachers ranked the procurement of additional computers as the greatest need (see Table 2). A majority of the teachers responding taught in schools which has 11-15 computers school-wide; their desire for more computers was clearly evident, as 56% of those responding listed this as a need. Additional needs that were most often chosen by teachers included computer-related activities for use with students unable to work at computers, more software, and a computer resource person in the building to help with the planning of instruction (see Table 2). Teachers’ knowledge of the computer curriculum
This survey also attempted to discern in what ways the computer curriculum currently presented in fourth and fifth grade differs from that in third grade. Responses to this question varied, but the answer given by the majority of teachers was that they simply did not know how their Table 2. Preceived needs in local computer education Perceived need More computers Additional computer-related activities for use with students not at computers An on-site computer resource person to help in planning and instruction More software Greater weekly time allotment for computer education A more detailed teachers’ guide Improved in-service training
Percent of respondents listing this a a need 56 41 40 39 24 20 20
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer
305
curriculum differed from that in the third grade. Others openly admitted that they felt their curriculum was much the same as the one in third grade, while some felt that it was generally the same curriculum at a higher level. It appears that these teachers were uncertain as to what it is they are actually expected to teach in grades four and five. Teachers’
instructional planning sources
The local school district provided teachers with three sources for planning computer instruction. These included the district list of objectives, the elementary essential computing skills, and task cards for each grade level. When asked if they had a personal copy of these documents, 80% of teachers responded that they had the objectives, 61% responded that they had the computing skills, but only 24% said they had the task cards. One-third of those responding stated that they used these three documents very infrequently or not at all. When questioned as to whether other sources were used in computer instructional planning, 23% of the teachers responded that other sources were utilized. These included primarily ideas gathered from other teachers, as well as personal material and curriculum materials received in workshops or in-services. Two-thirds of the teachers stated that they did not use sources additional to those provided by the district when planning computer instruction. Teachers’
views on accountability with regard to computer education
Very few (6%) of those responding to the questionnaire felt that it was extremely important that they be held accountable for teaching the district objectives in computer education. Thirty-eight percent, just over one-third, felt that it was moderately important, while 42% thought it was slightly important. When asked how important it was to report student progress quarterly on a pass/fail basis with regard to computer skills, 70% of the respondents thought it was either moderately or slightly important. Eighteen percent felt that giving students a pass/fail grade in computers was not at all important. CONCLUSIONS Several positive findings emerged from the survey data. First, a large number of fourth and fifth grade teachers reported taking some course work in computers. Secondly, the majority of teachers said that they have accepted the important role computers play in today’s society and have shown a willingness to address this in current instruction. In fact, 64% of those surveyed believed that more than 30 min per week is needed to provide adequate instruction in computers. However, the majority of teachers felt that much could be done to aid computer implementation. Factors to emerge as contraining computer use in this study were very similar to those found by Plomp et al. [14]. However, a number of unique insights as to additional factors affecting teachers’ use of the computer were gleaned. The first set of factors that appeared to have constrained implementation were teachers’ own attitudes toward computers and their feelings about being held accountable for teaching computers. Like other studies, these teachers here reported a lack of self-efficacy and confidence in their ability to teach computers. However, unlike other studies, the present study investigated what percentage of teachers owned computers at home and how often teachers used computers themselves. Most teachers surveyed said they did not nwn home computers nor did they use computers on a regular basis. It would seem that in-service courses need to address how teachers who use the computer very little themselves can encourage their students to do just the opposite. Also novel to this study was a survey of teacher attitudes about accountability with regard to computer instruction. Teachers overwhelmingly felt that being held accountable for both teaching the adopted computer objectives and giving pass/fail grades to students on 9-week report cards were not very important. Currently, no grading system is used in grades four and five for computers. However, the grading system for the 6-week computer education course in sixth grade is pass/fail. It would seem imperative that teachers need to be given a specific rationale for why some accountability system is important. A second set of constraining factors involved the need for better on-site support for teachers. It was suggested this support come in the form of a trained peer in each building who would help
CYNTHIAWINNANSand DEBORAHSAI~DOBROWN
306
to bridge the educational gap created by teachers’ lack of knowledge about computers. One unique insight offered by these teachers was their perception that the district policy of making the same person both the computer troubleshooter and the computer contact person for one school was a drastic mistake. Teachers also expressed a definite preference for a computer resource person over a written teacher resource guide. Perhaps investing district monies and resources into the training and expertise of a computer resource person who receives supplemental pay would provide teachers with the inspiration to become more competent computer educators. Another consideration would be to look into the feasibility of having a computer specialist at the elementary level who would manage the computer laboratory, making it a separate instructional class such as music, physical education, or art. This may possibly insure that students receive more uniform computer instruction throughout the district. Those few classroom teachers who have developed expertise with a computer may not necessarily be highly qualified computer instructors. It is one thing to know how to operate a computer, but quite another to be able to transfer this type of knowledge to others. While other studies have also indicated the need for improved on-site support, the present study indicated one specific instructional support need not documented elsewhere. This involved the dilema of how to occupy idle students with computer-related activities until they could take their turns at available computers. Certainly in-service programs need to provide several options in this regard for teachers. A third set of contraining factors seemed to involve teachers’ limited use of computer-related sources provided by the district and their lack of knowledge about the computer curriculum. The present study, unlike others, specifically followed teachers’ use of three district-produced sources; these included objectives, a list of essential computing skills and task cards. One-third of teachers reported that they were unfamiliar with the content of these sources. These data suggest that it is not enough for districts to merely provide teachers with computer-related materials; there must also be some follow-through to monitor teachers’ actual use of the materials. Unlike other studies the present data indicate that another potential difficulty for teachers in terms of teaching computers is their limited knowledge of the scope and sequence of the entire computer curriculum. Few teachers said they knew how the fourth and fifth grade curriculum varied from the third grade. In-service programs need to address this issue if these teachers are expected to serve as the vital link between the keyboarding skills presented in third grade and middle school computer studies which began in sixth grade. As in other studies, a fourth set of constraining factors involved limited allocations with regard to the number of computers available per school. In addition, though, this study revealed a dramatically limited amount of time allotted to teachers per week to teach computers. If implementing computers is a high priority for elementary schools, then surely more than 15 computers should be made available within a school building along with adequate time for instruction. In recent years the influx of computers into schools has occurred at a rapid pace. Although districts have invested vast funds to implement the computer curriculum at the elementary level, this study suggests the need for on-going research into how classroom teachers can more effectively transmit computer instruction to students in the upper elementary grades. REFERENCES 1, Jay G. M. and Willis S. L., The Elderly’s Attitudes Toward Computers: A Select Review of the Literature. Gerontological Society of America, Chicago, Ill. (1986). 2. Morris D. C., A survey of age and attitudes toward computers. J. Educ. Computing Rex 17, 73-78 (1988-1989). 3. Stevens D. J., Why computers in education may fail. Educafion 104, 370-376 (1984). 4. Tuckers M. S., Computers in the schools; what revolution? J. Commun. 35, 12-23 (1985). 5. Gory S., A 4-stage model of development for full implementation of computers for instruction in a school system. The Commuting Teacher II, 11-16 (1983). 6. Calfee R.: Computer literacy and book literacy: parallels and contrasts. Educ. Researcher 14, 8-13 (1985). 7. McGhan G.. Comnuter education: at school? at home? Who’s kidding whom? Contemporary Educ. 59,208-210 (1988). 8. Smith S. D.,‘Computer attitudes of teachers and students in relationship to gender and grade level. J. Educ. Compufing Res. 3, 479-494 (1987). 9. Greenfield P. M., Mind and Media: The Efects
of Television, Computers and Video Games. Fontana, London (1984). 10. Brady H., Hang onto the power to imagine: an interview with Joseph Weizenbaum. Classroom Computer Learning 6, 4-7 (1985).
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer
307
11. Heywood
G. and Norman P., Problems of educational innovation: the primary teacher’s response to using microcomputers. J. Comput. Assisted Learning 4, 34-43 (1987). 12. McGee G. W., The implementation and improvement of an effective microcomputer curriculum in the elementary school. Illinois Sch. Res. Dev. 22, 44-51 (1986). 13. Krendl K. A. and Lieberman D. A., Computers and learning: a review of recent research. J. Educ. Computing Res. 4, 367-389
(1988).
14. Plomp T., Pelgrum W. and Steememan A., Influence of computer use of schools’ curriculum: limited integration. Computers Educ. 14, 159-l 7 1. 15. Becker H. J., The Impact of Computer Use on Children’s Learning: What rhe Research Has Shown and Whar It Has Not. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Md (1988).
APPENDIX
Computer Studies Survey Section one: background information (1) Sex: (2) Age range:
male -
female -
under 25 -
26-30 -
31-35 _
3&40 -
4145 -
4655 -
over 50 (3)
Years of teaching experience: l-5 -
11-15 -
21-25 -
610 -
16-20 -
over 25 -
(4)
Do you have a home computer?
(5)
How many hours per week do you spend using a computer at home?
(6)
(7)
less than 2 -
610 -
2-5 -
11-15 -
less than 2 _
610 -
2-5 -
11-15 -
over 15
no -
Have you ever taken computer courses for college credit? no -
If so, how many hours credit have you received? 7-10 -
1-3 -
over 10 -
46(10)
over 15 -
Have you ever had in-service training designed to improve your computer instruction?
yes (9)
no-
How many hours per week do you spend using a computer at school?
yes (8)
yes -
How would you rate your level of computer expertise? Please circle the most appropriate response.
I high
(11)
above average
average
below average
low
How important do you feel computers to be in today’s classroom? Please circle the most appropriate response.
extremely
very
moderately
slightly
not at all
CYNTHIAWINNANSand DEBORAHSARDOBROWN
308
Section two: computer implementation (1)
Please rank
the following
needs in the order
of how important improved
more computers more computer
training
a more detailed guide
teachers’
a computer
resource
additional (2)
Check
-
person
it provides
the students
reason
training
building
activities
the single most important
inservice
greater weekly time allotment to teach computers
in your
computer-related
you think these are to address:
for use with students
for implementing
with an appreciation
not at the computers
computers:
for computers
it is fun it is a job requirement it provides other
preparation
(please
for the future
specify)
Section three: computer curriculum (1)
Please explain
(2)
How important
how what
do you feel computer
extremely
(3)
you teach at your grade education
very
level varies from the third grade curriculum
to be in grades 4 and 5? Please circle the most appropriate
moderately
List three of the most important
factors
slightly
that you feel influence
not at all
the way you teach about
computers.
1.
2.
3.
Section four: sources (1) How many computers (a) School?
(2)
(b) Classroom?
-
Do you have a personal yes -
(3)
Do you have a copy of the locally
adopted
Do you have a copy of the task cards
very frequently 5
(b) computer (c) task cards
computing
skills?
computer
objectives
for your grade
level?
developed
for your grade
level?
no -
When planning Please indicate
(a) district’s
essential
no -
yes (5)
-
copy of the district’s
no -
yes (4)
are in your:
computer education the most appropriate
frequently 4
essential
computing
objectives
instruction, how much do you use these to plan your lessons? response for each of the following
sometimes 3
skills
infrequently 2
very infrequently 1
response
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer (4)
309
Are there other sources you consult in planning computer instruction? yes -
no -
if yes, please specify:
Section jive: accountability (1) How important do you feel it is that teachers be held responsible for teaching the computer objectives adopted by the district
extremely
very
moderately
slightly
not at all
(2) How important do you feel it is that teachers report student progress in computer studies to parents on a pass/fail basis every quarter? extremely
very
moderately
slightly
not at all
SOME
FACTORS
University,
Copyright
AFFECTING ELEMENTARY USE OF THE COMPUTER
CYNTHIA Friends
1992
WINNANS
Division (Received
and
of Education, 14 May
DEBORAH
SARDO
2100 University,
0360-1315/92 %5.00+0.00 1992 Pergamon Press Ltd
TEACHERS’
BROWN
Wichita,
1991; revised 9 September
0
KS 67213, U.S.A.
1991)
Abstract-A survey of 70 fourth and fifth grade elementary teachers revealed several interesting factors, not documented elsewhere, that affect teachers’ use of the computer. First, very few teachers themselves owned computers or used them for personal reasons at home or school. Second, most teachers felt that neither they nor the students should be held accountable for the teaching or learning of computer objectives. Third, teachers were perplexed as to how to manage students who were not able to take their turn on the computer. Fourth, several teachers chose not to use district-provided sources written to help them implement the computer. Fifth, most teachers had little understanding of the scope and sequence of the district’s computer curriculum and how their grade level fit into this. Sixth, most teachers felt that they were allotted too little time to teach computers each week.
INTRODUCTION
The introduction of computers into our society has been met with differing views. It has been found that in the general population relatively younger males, of higher education and income have the most favourable predispositions in regard to the computer[l]. In another recent study educational level was even more likely to have an effect on one’s attitudes toward computers than age. Those who were better educated, whether young or old, were more favorably disposed to rapid advances in technology [2]. Teachers’ attitudes toward computers have also been studied. In one study conducted in 1979 almost one-third of the teachers interviewed felt that computers in education were a passing fancy; yet when the survey was conducted again in 1982, it was found that 80% of teachers surveyed believed microcomputers in education were not a fad and predicted they would have a drastic impact on education. But while the number of microcomputers had risen dramatically, the percentages of teachers actually using microcomputers in 1982 remained at or below 1% [3]. One of the reasons for such low usage may be that the push for computers in schools did not come from within the schools, but from upper-middle-class parents convinced that computers were destined to play a very important role in the workplace[4]. Although upper-middle-class parents felt a right to then be involved in the implementation, often teachers lacked the experience and expertise needed. Among the problems affecting computer instruction in schools have included a lack of trained teachers who acquired knowledge of computers during teacher training, scarce resources which prevented having enough equipment and supplies for full utilization, and few “model” programs to guide educational planners[5]. At this rate, it appears that students may quickly outdistance teachers in their acquisition of competence. Students currently are being given opportunities for regular, systematic instruction while studies indicate that most teachers do not have continuing instruction beyond inservice workshops[6]. Many computer professionals are either partly or mostly self-taught [7]. One recent study, conducted in a school system which had an all-grade, mandated program of computer instruction that had been in place for almost 2 years, found that teachers indicated significantly less confidence in their ability to use computers than students did[8]. In general, children show an eagerness to use computers. One advantage cited for using computers with children is that computers are intrinsically motivating to children the same way that video games are [9]. Because of the relatively recent introduction of computers into the elementary curriculum, there appears to be little research done on the extent to which teachers use computers with their classes and the factors influencing a teacher’s choice about whether or not to use computers. Although CAE 1814-D
302
CYNTHIAWINNANS and DEBORAHSARLXIBROWN
computer literacy objectives for all grade levels have been put in place in many districts, some teachers are choosing not to teach the stated objectives at the elementary level. In no other subject area would such a situation be tolerated[lO]. Several recent studies have examined what steps need to be taken school-wide to remedy this situation. A study in a borough of outer London determined that four items need to be identified and addressed in order to insure proper implementation of computers in schools[l 11. These are as follows: (1) a need and relevance of the change, (2) the clarity of its uses, (3) the complexity and extendibility of its uses and (4) the quality and practicality of the program. In contrast, a recent survey of principals cited teachers’ resistance, fear, anxiety and apathy as major obstacles to implementation, second only to the lack of financial resources[l2]. Teachers in the same study cited the lack of adequate software and the inability to see how computers benefit children in their classes as their main concerns with regard to implementation. Several variables were studied including age, experience, education, class size, teachers’ level of literacy, types of computers, time of acquisition, and the local socio-economic status. However, it was concluded that only teachers’ attitudes were significantly related to implementation. Most research on the use of computers in schools has been quantitative, utilizing experimental and survey research methods, although there is new interest in case study, ethnographic and other qualitative approaches. Some studies are beginning to address the role of the teacher in determining learning effects from computer applications. However, two recent meta-analyses reviewed few such examples [ 131. One such recent study examined the influences on computer use in three leading lower secondary schools in The Netherlands[l4]. Using case study and survey methods it was found that these schools had hardly passed the grassroots stage of development. Major factors cited by teachers for this included the following: a lack of hardware and software, too little support from school administration, too little external support, too few computer-using teachers, and a lack of inservice training facilities. More studies such as the one by Plomp et al. [14], need to be conducted in the elementary grades. While Plomp’s study is noteworthy, the issue of generalizability to other countries needs to be addressed through conducting research in a variety of context and locations. Also, as Becker notes, “Most of the studies reviewed, flawed and unflawed, have to do with maths, reading and language arts in the upper elementary grades, but that even if all of them were considered to be without damning flaws, together they do not come close to providing prescriptive data for deciding whether and how to use computers as adjuncts for instruction in these subjects.” Additionally, the whole instructional realm is different than just a few years ago. Word processing now accounts for 15% of all computer instruction, but was non-existent in the earlier studies. Becker feels that we need a new model of research in order to build a knowledge base that will tell us under what conditions and circumstances we can expect computers to be effective[l5]. Teachers are those who control the content of the lessons, yet their attitudes toward teaching computers to elementary students have rarely been investigated. In addition, few studies have been done to investigate elementary teachers’ perceptions of the factors which may constrain their use of computers. RESEARCH
QUESTIONS
This study surveyed fourth and fifth grade teachers in an attempt to discern the following: teachers’ educational background and comfort level with regard to computers, teachers’ perceptions about how computer implementation could be improved, teachers’ knowledge of the computer curriculum, sources used in planning computer instruction, and teachers’ attitudes with regard to accountability issues. Such information should provide insight into why teachers plan the way they do for computer instruction. RESEARCH
DESIGN
Description of district and the elementary computer curriculum
The district under study was a large, urban district located in a mid-western state which employed approx. 450 elementary teachers. The district’s elementary computer literacy plan was defined by
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer
303
listing activities for each district objective on task cards; both the district’s list of objectives and task cards were distributed to classroom teachers. In addition, a list of essential computer skills was given to teachers; 10 essential skills were listed for grades 3, 4 and 5. An Appendix to this list of skills was included with suggested approved software to facilitate instruction in these skills. However, no time frame or specific instructional guidelines were given to teachers. The central office administration believed that those teachers who had completed university credit courses such as “Microcomputers in the Classroom” and “Elementary School Keyboarding” should be able to devise their own instructional plans. Keyboarding was to be presented in third grade and reviewed and reinforced in grades four and five. Word processing was also to be introduced in grades four and five, as well as an introduction of graphics using a prepared disk and/or peripheral graphic devices. Fourth and fifth grade teachers were expected to reinforce keyboarding skills taught in the third grade. This progression was to continue until the sixth grade when, according to the middle school design, all students were required to take a well defined 6-week computer science course. Elementary teachers were allotted 30 min per week to teach computers. Teachers were not required to assign any grade to students in this area. Teachers could request help from the colleague in their building assigned the role of computer contact person or troubleshooter. Method For this study, surveys were sent to the 151 fourth and fifth grade teachers who taught in one large, urban school district. Fourth and fifth grade teachers were surveyed because they play such a vital role in linking computer skills attained in the third grade to those addressed at the middle school level. Questionnaires were mailed to the homes of each of the teachers (see Appendix). A cover letter accompanied the questionnaire, assuring confidentiality of responses and explaining that no follow-up of responses was planned, thereby making it essential that all surveys be completed within the allotted time period of 2 weeks. It was felt that by explaining that there could be no tracing of replies to the individual respondent, teachers would be more honest. The questionnaire was designed with a combination of open-ended and closed-ended questions using a Likert-type scale; it was plotted with the cooperation of a smaller group of classroom teachers drawn from grades two and three. Following this pilot certain questions were rewritten for clarification. Results of the questionnaire were recorded by tallying responses to the closedended questions while open-ended responses were examined to identify similar patterns. Overall percentages were tabulated; a majority of responses in a given category was interpreted to indicate the predominant attitudes of teachers affecting their use of computers with classes. RESULTS Of the 151 questionnaires mailed there were 70 replies, resulting in a response rate of 47%. In an attempt to gain an overall view of the sample population, personal data were collected which included gender, age, years of teaching experience, hours spent using a computer at home and at school, and perceived level of computer expertise. Of the 70 respondents, 79% were female and 21% were male. The ages of the teachers responding to the survey were dispersed fairly evenly. However, there was a higher response rate from persons at the two extremes of the scale, those with 10 or fewer years of experience and those with more than 25 years (see Table 1). Although the 47% response rate may have skewed the results, it should Table 1. Background of respondents Age range
Percent of total
Years of teaching experience
Percent of total
Under 25 26-30 31-35 3G40 41-45 46-50 over 50
II 13 II 16 14 16 19
l-5 6-10 II-15 16-20 21-25 over 35
24 20 19 II 10 16
304
CYNTHIA WINNANS and DEBORAH SARDO BROWN
be noted that the characteristics of the respondents with regard to sex, age, and years of experience closely matched the description provided by the district of all 151 fourth and fifth grade teachers. The results are presented with regard to the following aspects of computer instruction: teachers’ educational background and comfort level with regard to computer instruction, perceptions about how computer instruction could be improved, teachers’ knowledge of the computer curriculum, sources used in planning lessons for the computer, and teachers’ views on accountability in the area of computer education. Teachers’ background and comfort level
All fourth and fifth grade teachers surveyed reported having access to computers at school; 26% also reported owning a computer at home. Even though computers were available at school, 81% of all respondents reported using a computer at school less than 2 h per week. Of the 26% who owned a computer at home, 72% reported that they used it less than 2 h per week. It appears that teachers are not using computers to a great extent, even though computers are currently available. However, the majority of these teachers seemed to understand the importance of implementing computers in elementary schools. When asked to classify the most important reason for implementing computers, 70% responded that it provides preparation for the future. Additionally, 56% responded that they felt computers to be extremely important in today’s society. Although 82% of the teachers reported having had in-service training on computers and 77% reported having taken computer classes for college credit, only 21% rated their level of expertise as above average or high while nearly three-quarters of respondents rated this as average or below average. These answers seem to reflect little self-efficacy on the part of teachers with regard to computer expertise; despite taking formalized courses, including both in-service training and courses for college credit, teachers also reported rarely utilizing the computer for personal reasons. Of the 77% reporting that they received college credit in educational computing, a majority (62%) received 3 h or less of credit. Perhaps the reason for teachers’ relatively low ratings given to their own computer expertise lies in the fact that in-service training rarely was very extensive. Teachers’ perceptions about how computer implementation could be improved
When provided with a list of needs that could be addressed in order to help teachers implement computers, in-service training received the lowest ranking of the choices listed (see Table 2). It was interesting to note that while prior in-service training may not be meeting their present needs, these teachers did not perceive a need for improved in-service training. Instead, teachers ranked the procurement of additional computers as the greatest need (see Table 2). A majority of the teachers responding taught in schools which has 11-15 computers school-wide; their desire for more computers was clearly evident, as 56% of those responding listed this as a need. Additional needs that were most often chosen by teachers included computer-related activities for use with students unable to work at computers, more software, and a computer resource person in the building to help with the planning of instruction (see Table 2). Teachers’ knowledge of the computer curriculum
This survey also attempted to discern in what ways the computer curriculum currently presented in fourth and fifth grade differs from that in third grade. Responses to this question varied, but the answer given by the majority of teachers was that they simply did not know how their Table 2. Preceived needs in local computer education Perceived need More computers Additional computer-related activities for use with students not at computers An on-site computer resource person to help in planning and instruction More software Greater weekly time allotment for computer education A more detailed teachers’ guide Improved in-service training
Percent of respondents listing this a a need 56 41 40 39 24 20 20
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer
305
curriculum differed from that in the third grade. Others openly admitted that they felt their curriculum was much the same as the one in third grade, while some felt that it was generally the same curriculum at a higher level. It appears that these teachers were uncertain as to what it is they are actually expected to teach in grades four and five. Teachers’
instructional planning sources
The local school district provided teachers with three sources for planning computer instruction. These included the district list of objectives, the elementary essential computing skills, and task cards for each grade level. When asked if they had a personal copy of these documents, 80% of teachers responded that they had the objectives, 61% responded that they had the computing skills, but only 24% said they had the task cards. One-third of those responding stated that they used these three documents very infrequently or not at all. When questioned as to whether other sources were used in computer instructional planning, 23% of the teachers responded that other sources were utilized. These included primarily ideas gathered from other teachers, as well as personal material and curriculum materials received in workshops or in-services. Two-thirds of the teachers stated that they did not use sources additional to those provided by the district when planning computer instruction. Teachers’
views on accountability with regard to computer education
Very few (6%) of those responding to the questionnaire felt that it was extremely important that they be held accountable for teaching the district objectives in computer education. Thirty-eight percent, just over one-third, felt that it was moderately important, while 42% thought it was slightly important. When asked how important it was to report student progress quarterly on a pass/fail basis with regard to computer skills, 70% of the respondents thought it was either moderately or slightly important. Eighteen percent felt that giving students a pass/fail grade in computers was not at all important. CONCLUSIONS Several positive findings emerged from the survey data. First, a large number of fourth and fifth grade teachers reported taking some course work in computers. Secondly, the majority of teachers said that they have accepted the important role computers play in today’s society and have shown a willingness to address this in current instruction. In fact, 64% of those surveyed believed that more than 30 min per week is needed to provide adequate instruction in computers. However, the majority of teachers felt that much could be done to aid computer implementation. Factors to emerge as contraining computer use in this study were very similar to those found by Plomp et al. [14]. However, a number of unique insights as to additional factors affecting teachers’ use of the computer were gleaned. The first set of factors that appeared to have constrained implementation were teachers’ own attitudes toward computers and their feelings about being held accountable for teaching computers. Like other studies, these teachers here reported a lack of self-efficacy and confidence in their ability to teach computers. However, unlike other studies, the present study investigated what percentage of teachers owned computers at home and how often teachers used computers themselves. Most teachers surveyed said they did not nwn home computers nor did they use computers on a regular basis. It would seem that in-service courses need to address how teachers who use the computer very little themselves can encourage their students to do just the opposite. Also novel to this study was a survey of teacher attitudes about accountability with regard to computer instruction. Teachers overwhelmingly felt that being held accountable for both teaching the adopted computer objectives and giving pass/fail grades to students on 9-week report cards were not very important. Currently, no grading system is used in grades four and five for computers. However, the grading system for the 6-week computer education course in sixth grade is pass/fail. It would seem imperative that teachers need to be given a specific rationale for why some accountability system is important. A second set of constraining factors involved the need for better on-site support for teachers. It was suggested this support come in the form of a trained peer in each building who would help
CYNTHIAWINNANSand DEBORAHSAI~DOBROWN
306
to bridge the educational gap created by teachers’ lack of knowledge about computers. One unique insight offered by these teachers was their perception that the district policy of making the same person both the computer troubleshooter and the computer contact person for one school was a drastic mistake. Teachers also expressed a definite preference for a computer resource person over a written teacher resource guide. Perhaps investing district monies and resources into the training and expertise of a computer resource person who receives supplemental pay would provide teachers with the inspiration to become more competent computer educators. Another consideration would be to look into the feasibility of having a computer specialist at the elementary level who would manage the computer laboratory, making it a separate instructional class such as music, physical education, or art. This may possibly insure that students receive more uniform computer instruction throughout the district. Those few classroom teachers who have developed expertise with a computer may not necessarily be highly qualified computer instructors. It is one thing to know how to operate a computer, but quite another to be able to transfer this type of knowledge to others. While other studies have also indicated the need for improved on-site support, the present study indicated one specific instructional support need not documented elsewhere. This involved the dilema of how to occupy idle students with computer-related activities until they could take their turns at available computers. Certainly in-service programs need to provide several options in this regard for teachers. A third set of contraining factors seemed to involve teachers’ limited use of computer-related sources provided by the district and their lack of knowledge about the computer curriculum. The present study, unlike others, specifically followed teachers’ use of three district-produced sources; these included objectives, a list of essential computing skills and task cards. One-third of teachers reported that they were unfamiliar with the content of these sources. These data suggest that it is not enough for districts to merely provide teachers with computer-related materials; there must also be some follow-through to monitor teachers’ actual use of the materials. Unlike other studies the present data indicate that another potential difficulty for teachers in terms of teaching computers is their limited knowledge of the scope and sequence of the entire computer curriculum. Few teachers said they knew how the fourth and fifth grade curriculum varied from the third grade. In-service programs need to address this issue if these teachers are expected to serve as the vital link between the keyboarding skills presented in third grade and middle school computer studies which began in sixth grade. As in other studies, a fourth set of constraining factors involved limited allocations with regard to the number of computers available per school. In addition, though, this study revealed a dramatically limited amount of time allotted to teachers per week to teach computers. If implementing computers is a high priority for elementary schools, then surely more than 15 computers should be made available within a school building along with adequate time for instruction. In recent years the influx of computers into schools has occurred at a rapid pace. Although districts have invested vast funds to implement the computer curriculum at the elementary level, this study suggests the need for on-going research into how classroom teachers can more effectively transmit computer instruction to students in the upper elementary grades. REFERENCES 1, Jay G. M. and Willis S. L., The Elderly’s Attitudes Toward Computers: A Select Review of the Literature. Gerontological Society of America, Chicago, Ill. (1986). 2. Morris D. C., A survey of age and attitudes toward computers. J. Educ. Computing Rex 17, 73-78 (1988-1989). 3. Stevens D. J., Why computers in education may fail. Educafion 104, 370-376 (1984). 4. Tuckers M. S., Computers in the schools; what revolution? J. Commun. 35, 12-23 (1985). 5. Gory S., A 4-stage model of development for full implementation of computers for instruction in a school system. The Commuting Teacher II, 11-16 (1983). 6. Calfee R.: Computer literacy and book literacy: parallels and contrasts. Educ. Researcher 14, 8-13 (1985). 7. McGhan G.. Comnuter education: at school? at home? Who’s kidding whom? Contemporary Educ. 59,208-210 (1988). 8. Smith S. D.,‘Computer attitudes of teachers and students in relationship to gender and grade level. J. Educ. Compufing Res. 3, 479-494 (1987). 9. Greenfield P. M., Mind and Media: The Efects
of Television, Computers and Video Games. Fontana, London (1984). 10. Brady H., Hang onto the power to imagine: an interview with Joseph Weizenbaum. Classroom Computer Learning 6, 4-7 (1985).
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer
307
11. Heywood
G. and Norman P., Problems of educational innovation: the primary teacher’s response to using microcomputers. J. Comput. Assisted Learning 4, 34-43 (1987). 12. McGee G. W., The implementation and improvement of an effective microcomputer curriculum in the elementary school. Illinois Sch. Res. Dev. 22, 44-51 (1986). 13. Krendl K. A. and Lieberman D. A., Computers and learning: a review of recent research. J. Educ. Computing Res. 4, 367-389
(1988).
14. Plomp T., Pelgrum W. and Steememan A., Influence of computer use of schools’ curriculum: limited integration. Computers Educ. 14, 159-l 7 1. 15. Becker H. J., The Impact of Computer Use on Children’s Learning: What rhe Research Has Shown and Whar It Has Not. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Md (1988).
APPENDIX
Computer Studies Survey Section one: background information (1) Sex: (2) Age range:
male -
female -
under 25 -
26-30 -
31-35 _
3&40 -
4145 -
4655 -
over 50 (3)
Years of teaching experience: l-5 -
11-15 -
21-25 -
610 -
16-20 -
over 25 -
(4)
Do you have a home computer?
(5)
How many hours per week do you spend using a computer at home?
(6)
(7)
less than 2 -
610 -
2-5 -
11-15 -
less than 2 _
610 -
2-5 -
11-15 -
over 15
no -
Have you ever taken computer courses for college credit? no -
If so, how many hours credit have you received? 7-10 -
1-3 -
over 10 -
46(10)
over 15 -
Have you ever had in-service training designed to improve your computer instruction?
yes (9)
no-
How many hours per week do you spend using a computer at school?
yes (8)
yes -
How would you rate your level of computer expertise? Please circle the most appropriate response.
I high
(11)
above average
average
below average
low
How important do you feel computers to be in today’s classroom? Please circle the most appropriate response.
extremely
very
moderately
slightly
not at all
CYNTHIAWINNANSand DEBORAHSARDOBROWN
308
Section two: computer implementation (1)
Please rank
the following
needs in the order
of how important improved
more computers more computer
training
a more detailed guide
teachers’
a computer
resource
additional (2)
Check
-
person
it provides
the students
reason
training
building
activities
the single most important
inservice
greater weekly time allotment to teach computers
in your
computer-related
you think these are to address:
for use with students
for implementing
with an appreciation
not at the computers
computers:
for computers
it is fun it is a job requirement it provides other
preparation
(please
for the future
specify)
Section three: computer curriculum (1)
Please explain
(2)
How important
how what
do you feel computer
extremely
(3)
you teach at your grade education
very
level varies from the third grade curriculum
to be in grades 4 and 5? Please circle the most appropriate
moderately
List three of the most important
factors
slightly
that you feel influence
not at all
the way you teach about
computers.
1.
2.
3.
Section four: sources (1) How many computers (a) School?
(2)
(b) Classroom?
-
Do you have a personal yes -
(3)
Do you have a copy of the locally
adopted
Do you have a copy of the task cards
very frequently 5
(b) computer (c) task cards
computing
skills?
computer
objectives
for your grade
level?
developed
for your grade
level?
no -
When planning Please indicate
(a) district’s
essential
no -
yes (5)
-
copy of the district’s
no -
yes (4)
are in your:
computer education the most appropriate
frequently 4
essential
computing
objectives
instruction, how much do you use these to plan your lessons? response for each of the following
sometimes 3
skills
infrequently 2
very infrequently 1
response
Elementary teachers’ use of the computer (4)
309
Are there other sources you consult in planning computer instruction? yes -
no -
if yes, please specify:
Section jive: accountability (1) How important do you feel it is that teachers be held responsible for teaching the computer objectives adopted by the district
extremely
very
moderately
slightly
not at all
(2) How important do you feel it is that teachers report student progress in computer studies to parents on a pass/fail basis every quarter? extremely
very
moderately
slightly
not at all