Technology Intergration in Teaching, Student Motivation, and Reading Achievement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.312.2412Abstract
The study investigated technology integration impact on students’ reading achievement, student motivation, and teacher proficiency in technology integration. The objective of the study was to find ways to improve students’ classroom experiences in order to foster learning. The focus was on improving students’ reading scores. The importance of the study was that reading exam scores together with all other subjects were declining in selected community junior secondary school. Using the theory of experiential learning, we designed the single group pretest and posttest study. Three research questions were formulated and investigated. Data were collected from four junior secondary schools, two in Lobatse City and two in the city of Gaborone. A sample of 140 students was pretested and post tested for reading achievement and motivation after been exposed to the Interactive board technology teaching. (SMART board technology). Four teachers for the four classes were also pretested and post tested for proficiency after been trained. Data were analyzed using SPSS. Results showed that the integration of technology in the method of teaching improved, reading scores, motivation and teacher proficiency.
Keywords
Reading achievement, blended e - learning, experiential learning and motivation
References
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85, 275–314. doi:10.3102/0034654314551063Angelo, T. A. (1998). Principles to teach by. Accounting Education News, 4(5), 11-14.
Bates. C. Hopkins, a. & Kratcoski, A. (2012). Using SMART boards to enhance student learning. Journal of the research center for Educational Technology392), 47-49
Anglin, G. J. (1995). Instructional technology: Past, present, and future. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Libraries Unlimited.
Bauer. C. (2010). Promotive activities in technology enhanced learning. The Impact of Media ... Selection on Peer Review, Active Listening and Motivational Aspects. Frankfurt.Peter Lang
Brian, R. Belland, Andrew , E. Walker, N. J. Kim Mason, L. (2016)Synthesizing Results From Empirical Research on Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education: A Meta-Analysis Review of Educational Research. DOI: 10.3102/0034654316670999
Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 444-460.
Clark, S. A. (2004). Instrctional technology, motivation attitudes and behavior. An investigation of at risk learner in the middle school general music classroom. Dissretation.com USA 2003
David K. E. & Popova, A (2016). What Really Works to Improve Learning in Developing Countries? An Analysis of Divergent Findings in Systematic Reviews.
Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / THE WORLD BANK doi:10.1093/wbro/lkw004 Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational designs of instruction. In C. M. Regolith (Ed.),
Keller, J. M. (2009). Motivational design for learning and performance, the ARCS modela proach.New York Springer
Marzano, R. I. (2012) Teaching with interactive white boards.Educational leadership.67(3)
O’Connor, M.C. ((2012). Teachers hold the real key to whiteboard effectiveness Education week pp13-15
Piciotto, H. (2012). Why I use interactive whiteboard. Mathematics teacher.114(4)
Instructional design theories and models (pp. 386-395). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lefranciose, (2000)). Psychology for teachers. Belmont: Wadsworth..
Losike-Sedimo, N.C. (2010). Telepresence and Learning Style: Effect on achievement
Liu, T. C., Lin, Y. C., Tsai, M. J. & Paas, F. (2011). Split-attention and redundancy effects on mobile learning in physical environments. Computers and education, 56 (2), 172-181. and attitude of university students.Viena:LAMBERT.
Marice, M; Losike-Sedimo; Nonofo (2013). Teacher technology integration. Professional development model. (Smart board). Achievement and smart board proficiency scores. SAGE Open, Vol10, No.
Reglin, Gary; Akpo-Sanni, Coretta; Losike-Sedimo; Nonofo (2013). The Effect of a professional Development. Classroom Management Model on At-Risk Elementary Students' Misbehaviors .Education, Vol. 133,
Schipper J. M. & Yocum, R. G. (2016). Interactive Whiteboard Technologies in High School: A Comparison of Their Impact on the Levels of Measure That Determine a Return on Investment Journal of Educational Technology System June 1, 2016 44: 377-40
Smith, A., & Pecore, J. (2008). Students experiences SMART board through constructivists values.. Research projects presented at annual research forum (pp169 – 174)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
