Teachers' Concerns and Uses of iPads in the Classroom with the Concerns-Based Adoption Model

138 Pages·2015·2.22 MB·English

by  Stewart, Gail

TEACHERS’ CONCERNS AND USES OF iPADS IN THE CLASSROOM
WITH THE CONCERNS-BASED ADOPTION MODEL
Gail Stewart
Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS
August 2015
APPROVED:
Mei Hoyt, Major Professor
Kelley King, Committee Member
Lin Lin, Committee Member
Jeanne Tunks, Committee Member
Jim Laney, Chair of the Department of
Teacher Education and Administration
Jerry R. Thomas, Dean of College of
Education
Costas Tsatsoulis, Interim Dean of the
Toulouse Graduate School
Stewart, Gail. Teachers’ Concerns and Uses of iPads in the Classroom with the
Concerns-Based Adoption Model. Doctor of Philosophy (Curriculum and Instruction), August
2015, 130 pp., 13 tables, 15 figures, references, 37 titles.
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of high school teachers’ concerns,
willingness, aptitude, and use of iPads in the classroom during the adoption of a new technology.
The design of this case study included a sample of eight teachers from the English, math,
science, and history departments who were surveyed, observed, and interviewed using the
concerns-based adoption model (CBAM). This study is guided by three research questions: (1)
What are teachers’ concerns about using iPads in the high school English, math, science, and
history classrooms? (2) What are teachers’ levels of iPad use in the English, math, science, and
history classrooms? (3) What are teachers’ pedagogical practices as they use iPads in the
English, math, science, and history classrooms? To research these questions, the study measured
teacher concerns with the triangulation of three diagnostic instruments from the concerns-based
adoption model: the Stages of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ), the Innovation Configurations
Map (IC Map), and the Levels of Use (LoU) matrix. CBAM was used to address the scarcity of
literature regarding iPad use in content-area classrooms. The findings from the research show
that the impact of introducing a new technology is more multifaceted than previously assumed.
A teacher’s inclination and skill to use a new technology with their students varies considerably
within a school and different approaches are observed across subject areas such as English, math,
science, and history. When the concerns-based adoption model is used in organizational change,
teacher concerns are revealed, which leads to finding opportunities for intervention and support
by change facilitators who help individuals progress in the adoption of an innovation.
Copyright 2015
by
Gail Stewart
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My first acknowledgement of gratitude goes to my family for their support. My
wonderful husband, Greg, encouraged me to press on and finish my dissertation – love you!
My children, Peter and Hannah, have been a wellspring of joy and encouragement during my
doctoral journey. Love you guys! Thank you, Greg! Thank you, Peter and Hannah!
I would also like to thank my dissertation committee chair, Dr. Mei Hoyt, for agreeing to
work with me after former two committee chairs left the university for other opportunities. Dr.
Hoyt encouraged me, gave me all-important deadlines to meet, and she actually forecasted a
completion date for me – no small feat after beginning my first doctoral class in January 2007!
Thank you, Dr. Hoyt!
Another pivotal person in my doctoral journey was Dr. Jeanne Tunks, who guided me
toward the Concerns-Based Adoption Model for my dissertation. Dr. Tunks patiently
explained CBAM to me, and she was available any time I had questions. Dr. Tunks has a
dedication to “doc” students that is giving and selfless. Thank you, Dr. Tunks!
I would also like to thank committee members, Dr. Kelley King and Dr. Lin Lin. I
thought of Dr. King after taking a doctoral-level class with her. We had to complete a project
where we analyzed two dissertations and presented them. I appreciated the practical yet
visionary assignment; it truly helped me envision my own future dissertation. I truly value Dr.
King’s insightful comments and input. I thought of Dr. Lin after taking one of her Learning
Technologies classes, and it piqued my interest in learning even more about using technology
in the classroom. After Dr. Lin agreed to be on my committee, I appreciated all of her positive
feedback. Thank you, Dr. King! Thank you, Dr. Lin!
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................................iv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................1
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................2
Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................................3
Research Questions ................................................................................................................3
Rationale ................................................................................................................................3
History of Concerns-Based Adoption Model ........................................................................4
Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) ..........................................................................5
Change Principles ..................................................................................................................6
Definition of Key Terms ........................................................................................................11
Limitations .............................................................................................................................11
Significance of the Study .......................................................................................................12
Summary ................................................................................................................................12
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................14
Teachers and the Change Process ..........................................................................................14
Concerns-Based Adoption Model Research ..........................................................................16
Teachers and Technology Resistance ....................................................................................20
Changes to Pedagogical Practices with iPads ........................................................................23
Conflicting Attitudes toward iPads ........................................................................................23
Summary ................................................................................................................................24
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................25
Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................................25
Research Questions ................................................................................................................25
Design ....................................................................................................................................25
Setting ....................................................................................................................................26
Participants .............................................................................................................................33
Recruiting ...............................................................................................................................34
iv
Content Area Teacher Profiles ...............................................................................................34
Data Collection ......................................................................................................................35
Concerns-Based Adoption Model ..........................................................................................35
Instrumentation ......................................................................................................................36
ISTE Classroom Observation Tool (ICOT) ...............................................................36
Stages of Concern Questionnaire ...............................................................................36
Innovation Configurations Map .................................................................................38
Levels of Use .............................................................................................................41
The Basic Interview Protocol .....................................................................................42
Procedure ...............................................................................................................................42
Data Analysis .........................................................................................................................45
Summary ................................................................................................................................49
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................50
Research Questions .................................................................................................................50
Findings...................................................................................................................................51
Participant 1 – English Teacher, Ms. Labato ..............................................................51
SoCQ Survey Outcomes ..................................................................................51
Levels of Use (LoU) ........................................................................................53
Participant 2 – English Teacher, Mr. Woods ..............................................................54
SoCQ Survey Outcomes ..................................................................................54
Levels of Use (LoU) ........................................................................................56
Participant 3 – History Teacher, Mr. Fallar .................................................................59
SoCQ Survey Outcomes ....................................................................................59
Levels of Use (LoU) ..........................................................................................61
Participant 4 – History Teacher, Ms. Welsh ................................................................62
SoCQ Survey Outcomes .....................................................................................62
v
Levels of Use (LoU) ............................................................................................64
Participant 5 – Math Teacher, Mr. Prime .....................................................................66
SoCQ Survey Outcomes ......................................................................................66
Levels of Use (LoU) ............................................................................................67
Participant 6 – Math Teacher, Ms. Lenz .......................................................................68
SoCQ Survey Outcomes ......................................................................................68
Levels of Use (LoU) ............................................................................................70
Participant 7 – Science Teacher, Ms. Jones .................................................................71
SoCQ Survey Outcomes .....................................................................................71
Levels of Use (LoU) ..........................................................................................73
Participant 8 – Science Teacher, Mr. Schoner .............................................................73
SoCQ Survey Outcomes .....................................................................................73
Levels of Use (LoU) ..........................................................................................75
Stages of Concern (SoCQ) Across All Content Areas ..................................................77
Levels of Use (LoU) Across All Content Areas ...........................................................80
CHAPTER 5 IMPLICATIONS .........................................................................................................82
Purpose ....................................................................................................................................82
Research Questions .................................................................................................................82
Facilitating Change and Change Facilitators ..........................................................................82
Survey of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ) .............................................................................83
Levels of Use (LoU) ...............................................................................................................89
SoCQ, LoU, and iPads in the Classroom .................................................................................94
Teachers’ Pedagogical Practices ..............................................................................................96
v i
Implications for Future Research ............................................................................................98
Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................98
Hall and Hord’s 10 Change Principles .....................................................................................101
APPENDIX A STAGES OF CONCERN QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................................106
APPENDIX B ISTE CLASSROOM OBSERVATION TOOL (ICOT) ...........................................110
APPENDIX C INNOVATION CONFIGURATION MAP FOR THE STUDY OF THE
INNOVATION, IPADS IN THE CLASSROOM .............................................................................114
APPENDIX D LEVELS OF USE OF THE INNOVATION, IPADS IN THE CLASSROOM .......118
APPENDIX E INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR TEACHERS AFTER TAKING THE SoCQ:
THE BASIC INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ..........................................................................................122
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................126
vi i
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
It feels great to have the iPad launched into the world - it's going to be a
game changer.
Steve Jobs
Change is inevitable. Change in educational initiatives is also inevitable.
At the beginning of every school year, teachers are asked to change and inevitably, this
change takes the form of a new instructional method for the classroom. During the busy week
before school begins, teachers attend a variety of workshops to learn new types of instruction
that will enrich the teacher’s pedagogical menu and possibly lead toward greater student
achievement. Educators are often asked to embrace a new kind of technology, and such was the
case when Apple introduced the iPad in 2011. The lightweight, portable computing device was
thought to be a boon to education and millions of dollars were invested in putting iPads into
schools, even before assessing what kind of benefits such a device would provide. With
standardized tests as the current measure of student success, how could the use of iPads in the
classroom make a difference? Would teachers readily incorporate iPads in their curriculum?
Does easy iPad portability and availability make it an advantageous addition to the classroom?
Did teachers have any reservations about using iPads in the classroom? Lacking research-based
answers to these questions, nevertheless, iPads became a new complement to classrooms.
After Apple introduced the iPad in 2011, many school districts made substantial purchase
orders to bring this form of mobile technology into the classroom (Hu, 2014). With this new tool
distributed to many teachers and students by the fall of 2012, administrative leaders at schools
asked teachers to discover innovative ways to use the iPads in the classroom. Students were
excited to have access to games and the Internet; however, teachers had mixed feelings about
1
deploying iPads in the classroom. As easy as it was to try new apps, it seemed more challenging
to find methods to incorporate meaningful and challenging classroom lessons with this new
portable device that might ultimately increase student achievement.
Csikszentmihalyi (1993) researched the process of replacing one new idea or tool with
another; “ideas, values, technologies that do the job with the least demand on psychic energy will
survive; an appliance that does more work with less effort will be preferred” (p. 123). The iPad
appeared to show relative ease of use, but this new tool was untested in the classroom. Teachers
did not have a plan for use of the iPad; therefore, some teachers resisted the innovation because
they did not know how to successfully use the iPad in their curriculum.
Knight (2009) notes the ongoing process of change in schools occurs in an “attempt,
attack, abandon cycle” (p. 4). In this cycle of introducing a new practice into a school, the
attempt to introduce a new innovation and attack, or approach, the curriculum with the new
innovation often begins early in the school year with good intentions. However, when limited
support is offered to sustain the innovation, the new idea or tool is abandoned. (Knight, 2009).
Seasoned teachers are often circumspect of new ideas because they tend view new programs
introduced at the beginning of a school year with a preconceived outlook, often predicting its
demise by the end of the year. Therefore, experienced teachers may choose to not embrace the
innovation because they are aware of the often-temporal nature of educational innovations.
Statement of the Problem
In the fall of 2013, the school district issued iPads to a chosen group of schools for a pilot
study. The receipt of iPads came with a request for teachers to use their iPads as a creative,
instructional tool. District support for the use of iPads in the classroom was initially minimal,
coming with the suggestion for teachers to use iPads in a creative way. The structured support
2