Zhao & Frank: Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools

Zhao, Y. & Frank, K. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807-840.

“There can be infinite uses of the computer and of new age technology, but if teachers themselves are not able to bring it into the classroom and make it work, then it fails.” (Nancy Kassebaum)

The successful integration of technology into the classroom cannot be assured by simply making the tools available.  Some teachers readily embrace new technology and use it to create rich and meaningful learning for their students.  However this is not the case for all. In this article, Zhao and Frank use the invasion of the zebra mussel into the Great Lakes as a metaphor to represent the adoption of educational technology in schools. They state, “the successful invasion of the zebra mussel is a result of many factors working together” and therefore, if we want to understand computer use in schools we must study the interactions between all the contributing factors.

They begin by analyzing factors previously found to affect technology use in schools:

1. Schools naturally and necessarily resist changes that will put pressure on existing practices (Cohen, 1987; Cuban, 1986)
2. Limited classroom space and bulky size of computers (Collins, 1996)
3. Teacher’s unwillingness to take students to the lab (Collins, 1996)
4. Lack of computer access in students homes (Collins, 1996)
5. Teachers’ negative attitude and lack of expertise with technology (Rogers, 1995)
6. Conflicting ideas about the educational value of technology (Cuban, 1999)
7. Constantly changing nature of technology difficult for teachers to keep up with (Cuban, Zhao et al, 2002)
8. Unreliability of technology (Cuban, Zhao et al, 2002)

They then describe how they will use the ecology metaphor (or an ecosocial system)

• Ecosystem = schools and their classrooms (they make up a complex system containing many parts and relationships)
• Biotic – teachers (keystone species), students, parents, administrators, computer uses, external educational innovations (invasive species)
• Abiotic – physical setting, location of computers, grades, subjects taught)

They then discuss how the introduction of new species (technology) affects the equilibrium of the ecosystem: and can have several possible consequences including:

1. Invasive species dominate and wipe out the keystone species, often destroying the ecosystem
2. Invasive species integrates with ecosystem. Equilibrium is reached between native and invasive species
   1. the process of integration often changes the species involved (natural selection)
3. Invasive species fails to gain foothold and dies.

They go on to say that whether technologies (the invasive species) are successfully adopted into schools (the ecosystem) and become permanently established depends on their compatibility with the teacher (keystone species), other biotic and abiotic factors. Therefore, it becomes important that we understand the relationship between:

Biotic:

The characteristics of the invading (invasive) species

• Some of the technologies are judged to be more useful, or fit for the task, than others, and they survive while others perish that are judged to be less fit. (Survival of the fittest)
• Niche – new technological uses programmed to fill a previously unmet need

The characteristics of the existing (native) species

• “teachers, librarians, students, books, dictionaries, projection devices, workbooks, desks, and other “species”.”
• Teacher affinity towards technology, personal and professional.
• Technology uses already well established (used and promoted by peers and Pro-D)
• The survival of computer use is determined largely by its compatibility with teachers (as they are the keystone species in the ecosystem)
• Inter-species competition – teachers pressure each other or help each other or both to use technology

Abiotic

• Society and government both effect how and to what degree teachers use technology (if the district provides the resources to support a use, then the use is likely to spread more quickly)
• Time for exploration and practice. Tech support.
• Availability of space

In order to examine this further, Zhao and Frank conducted an experiment. They wanted to understand: 1) How institutional factors affect technology use and 2) What might affect the levels and types of technology use in schools. They found:

• Most used technologies in schools are email, telephone systems and computers in the classroom (as opposed to a computer lab)
• In-room telephones are critical in integrating technology into the ecosystem as they allow for teacher connection
• Most frequent uses of computers by teachers were for communication with parents and preparation for instruction
• Least frequent uses of computers by teachers were activities directly involving the students (student-student communication or student inquiry)

Conclusion: simpler technologies that require little change on the part of the teacher (less time and energy to do) are used more frequently

• English teachers (for writing activities) and upper grade teachers were more likely to use computers
• Teachers receiving support from colleagues were more likely to use computers for their students instead of just for their own use

 Conclusion: what matters most for teachers is their peers in the local environment (teachers are strongly influenced by their colleagues)

• Teachers who received time to experiment with new software were more likely to use computers for student purposes
• Teachers who felt the district was implementing too many new innovations were less likely to introduce them to their students
• Teachers who felt computers were compatible with their teaching style were more likely to use them with their students

Zhao and Frank determined what they believe to be the steps to technology integration into the school ecosystem:

1. District provides computer hardware
2. External factors (including social and political) interact with the technology within the ecosystem
3. Existing species (teachers) interact with the technology (dependent on their personal history, pedagogical practices, perceived costs of use etc.)
4. Teacher and technology co-evolve *”Mutual adaptation between species, especially between existing and new species, requires frequent contact and active interactions”

They discuss how teachers are the most important barriers to technology integration and found there were four main factors that contributed to their desire to adapt:

1. Recruitment/selection (depends on grade level and subject taught but also how willing a teacher is to adapting to technology – should be included in the hiring process)
2. Training/socialization (socialization between teachers was shown to be more valuable than in-services and pro-d conferences in changing beliefs regarding the value of computers)
3. Providing opportunities to explore and learn (districts should be allowing release time to engage technology and consider its applications in specific contexts – shown to be very important)
4. Leveraging change through the social context (teachers interacting and helping each other with technology increases technology use – but be careful here because social pressure can also work against technology integration depending on the school culture)

Recommendations:

1. Instead of spending money on large in-services, provide teachers opportunities to explore computer applications
2. Give teachers time to help each other explore technology (technology play-days)
3. Schools should limit the number of innovations they attempt to implement and devote their resources to a select few (less overwhelming to teachers)