2009lorem ipsum dolor met set quam nunc parum

imag

ine

MEGHAN CRAIG

Advocating for Technology Integration in an Early Childhood Setting: a

case study of teacher practices at River Valley School in Calgary, AlbertaINTRODUCTION

River Valley SchoolRiver Valley School is an inclusive

private dual stream school that provides both Montessori and Progressive education for students in Junior Kindergarten to Grade Six. River Valley School prides itself on being the only accredited Montessori school in Western Canada. Currently, we have 163 students enrolled, and 18 staff who are divided by their teaching believes and practices.

Progressive ReflectionIt’s 8:30 a.m. Monday morning I

can hear my grade one students eagerly walking down the hallway toward our progressive classroom chatting with their friends. Once at their spot, they take off their jackets, hang up their backpacks, change their shoes, put their lunch kits into their cubby and dig out their agendas. With a quick and cheery good morning welcome from me, they enter

into our classroom and immediately walk to our Smartboard and sign themselves in by dragging their name into the “at school” box. Once we have sang O’Canada and listened to our morning announcements, our classroom morning meeting begins. Our class gets cozy on our carpet and begins to take turns going to the Smartboard to do our daily calendar jobs. Students swiftly move through their jobs- changing the calendar date, organizing the days of the week, checking the Weather Network for up to date temperatures and counting the days in school. After each job is complete, each student saves their work while another student moves on to the next task.From the moment my students walk into our classroom they are immersed in technology. This short morning reflection into my grade one classroom allowed me to see that my beliefs surrounding technology integration in the classroom environment echos the notion that “computers, like crayons or blocks are tools for learning and problem solving.” (Scoter and Boss, p.16)

Montessori ReflectionIt’s 8:30 a.m. Monday morning I

can hear students eagerly walking down the hallway toward a Montessori classroom. Once at their spot, they take off their jackets, hang up their backpacks, change their shoes, put their lunch kits into their cubby and dig out their agendas. Students walk into their classroom drop off their agenda and get started on writing their work plan for the day. After O’Canada, students meet on their carpet while a third year takes attendance with a clip board and a pencil.

These two brief reflections into both Progressive and Montessori programs at River Valley School provide us with a small glimpse into the beliefs, concerns and practices of teachers when it comes to technology integration in their unique classroom environments.

Through exploring these beliefs and practices further, this paper will attempt to answer how to begin to bridge the gap between Progressive and Montessori teachers regarding technology use in their classrooms.

Our RealityAccording to Stats Canada in 2010

8 out of 10 Canadian households (79%) had access to the Internet. Over half of connected households used more than one type of device to go on-line. Rates for Internet home connection were the highest in British Columbia 84% and Alberta with 83%. (http://www.statcan.gc.ca) To put this in perspective further, a student survey conducted in 2005 by the Young Canadians in a Wired World showed the results for Grade 4 to 11 population begin:

- 41% have an MP3 player- 37% have their own computer- 23% have their own cell phone- 22 % have a webcam for personal

use. From these statistics alone we can

see the range of technologies that are being used by young children in their homes at an early age. This technology exposure experienced by children is changing the face of education as a whole. We now are dealing with a new generation of learners that approach learning in a much different way then before. Researchers have named this generation as ‘digital natives’ (Pernsky, 2001,2005). Acknowledging that we are now facing a new generation of learners, I turned inward to take a closer look at our River Valley School community to see how we were dealing with educating this new group of technology savvy students.

Home School Connection- Parent Survey

Realizing that most children are introduced to technology at home in the early years of their development I wanted to investigate the impacts that technology had on our students. How does our private school community compare to the current statistic on technology use? Is there a difference in beliefs between our Montessori and Progressive parents regarding

technology use? How does our e-society impact our parent’s beliefs and ideas of education for their child?

To find some answers to these questions I needed to get feedback from both sides of our parent community. I constructed an on-line survey with questions that would allow parents to reflect on their children’s use of technology at home and allow them to share their beliefs for technology in an early childhood elementary school setting. More specifically, they were asked what technologies they wanted their child to use (if any) in their classroom setting. The survey consisted of seven open ended questions which allowed parents to write up to two hundred word responses if they chose for each. I surveyed the parents from my Progressive classroom and parents from the Lower Elementary Montessori classroom. The age of the students in the survey range from five to eight years old. The family dynamic is typically heterosexual, double parent middle to upper class families. The survey was emailed out to all the parents and completed on-line.

Progressive Survey Results

Out of my 17 families I received 11 responses. The results of the survey indicated on average students were engaging with a variety of technology in their home setting for 198 minutes or 3 and a half hours per day. The technologies they reported their children using ranged from iPads, lap tops, IPods, DS and t.v. to name the most common. When asked about their beliefs about whether or not technology played an important role in the classroom the responses were a unanimous yes! Parents understand the impacts different technologies had and continue to have on their child’s daily life but view technology as a tool for educators to help strengthen learning. One parent illustrates this point with their response that stated, “we use technology in our everyday lives and it will continue to play an important part of it. If children don’t learn at an early age, they will be behind those children who have. It is a great supplemental tool for learning, but should not replace one on one training in the classroom.” (Grade One parent)

This parent survey allowed me as an educator to grasp my parents beliefs and expectations for the integration of technology as an educational tool. Technology should be used as a tool that is guided and monitored by teachers. It should never replace the bond between the teacher and the student. Progressive parent beliefs support the idea that “technology provides children with the additional support they need to be successful as the increase their skills” (Scoter & Boss p.14) and allow them to be successful in the real world.

Montessori Parent Survey Results

With our Progressive parent population represented, I sent out the same online survey to the parents of our Lower Elementary Montessori classroom. This classroom is multi-aged. The classroom itself has 28 students in grades 1 to 3. Out of the 28 families I sent the survey too, I received 12 responses. On average students were engaging with a variety of technologies for two and a half hours everyday. The technologies that the students were using were very similar to students on the progressive side. Parents recorded their children spent time with the following devices: iPads, iPods, laptops and DS most frequently.

When asked about their beliefs about whether technology played an important role in the classroom the responses for the majority were yes. One Montessori parent responded, “yes but limited use of technology. Early childhood education involves teaching children life skills in a group setting (beyond family) therefore children need time to develop interpersonal skills not have their head in a computer or other technology that does not allow interaction” Montessori parent.

This response, along with the others indicated to me that they were in agreement with the Progressive parents. Among both sets of parents the general consensus is that technology in the classroom should be seen as a tool to support learning and should not replace the teacher and student connection. Although both sets of parents support two very different educational philosophies, both sets of parents expected their children to be using technology in their educational setting.

It also allowed me to see that unlike most schools, all of our students have a high level of interaction with technology before entering school. According to the research, many schools encounter students who enter school having had no technology prior experiences. Those schools are challenged to catch those students up to the rest of their classmates with technology use. This is just not the case with our family dynamic. I believe this may be a direct result of our parents socio-economic status.

With parent beliefs from both streams established and understood, I wanted to take a closer look at how educators at our school were using technology in their classrooms as well as their beliefs.

Teacher Survey ResultsOnce again, I sent an on-line survey

to our teaching staff. Out of a teaching staff of 18 I received 7 responses, 3 responses from the Progressive stream and 4 responses from the Montessori stream. From the teachers that responded the majority have ten or more years of teaching experience. Four teachers responded from division one and three teachers responded from division two. When asked about what types of technologies were being used within classrooms there was a significant difference between division one and division two. Which there should be in my opinion simply due to the skill level and progression of the students as they get older. Division one teachers typically used technology through iPads and lap tops with websites that supported both language and math skills. Although there were some common uses of technology between the Progressive and Montessori

program the difference between the two programs became clear when it came to beliefs. Upon further analysis of the survey, I found that even within our small school we have various ideas and beliefs regarding technology use in our classrooms. Surprisingly enough, the difference between streams had nothing to do with the age of the teacher or their own comfort with technology which is what I was expecting according to the research that I read. Research states, one of the top reasons teachers weren’t integrating technology into their environments was that they were uncomfortable and unconfident in their own technology skills (Chen & Chang, 2006; Plowman and Stephen 2005) Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 10(3) p.248) I found this not to be true for our teaching staff. When asked about the problems teachers were encountering while using different technologies in their classrooms the most frequent concerns I received can be broken into two different topics. The first concern was about the slowness of the technologies. Teachers found that they were spending time installing updates before the student could continue with the work. This was echoed in the responses from both streams.

The second more important concern surrounds teacher beliefs about when and how technology should be integrated into their classroom environment. This is where our school is divided. It became apparent that our school seemed to be facing another challenge not mentioned in the research. To illustrate the divide, a teacher on the progressive side sums up the general consensus of the progressive staff with this comment regarding technology integration, “I believe that they (the students) should be exposed to aspects of technology at a young age. They are quick to pick things up and there are many educational benefits for the younger child. It also helps when the students are older and therefore can use advance technology when they are older.” Progressive teacher.

One Montessori teacher expresses their ideas by sharing, “Before grade three, I think technology should take a limited role in early childhood education. At that point and time I think students are building skills that should be

the focus (literacy, numeracy, penmanship, etc.)” Montessori teacher.

Our teachers need to reach a common understanding about technology use in our classrooms between the two different pedagogies. To reach this common understanding, I believe that our school needs to take a closer look at not only our students but our parent feedback about technology as well. Our students are now immersed in a digital world. According to the parent survey, technology is seen not only as a valuable tool but an essential and expected one for both streams. With this being the case, the question now becomes how do we ensure that our students from both streams are receiving equal technology opportunities and experiences? How do we bridge the gap between the streams and get all educators on the same page about technology use at our school?

Montessori student engaged in hands on materials

Supporting

Technology in Your

Classroom

EnvironmentThe Education of Young Children state that learning environments that embrace technology must incorporate the following:

1. Embed authenticity

2. Emphasize knowledge construction

3. Use open ended learning

4. Include student cooperation and collaboration

5. Integrate mixed ability levels and differentiated instruction where appropriate and possible

“ Computers, like crayons

or blocks, are tools for

learning and problem

solving”

(Scoter, Boss, p.11)

Montessori Classroom Environment

The Case for Technology- What our Teaching Staff Needs to Consider:

I believe that first and foremost to bridge the gap between our two programs we need to strengthen our understanding of how to integrate technology in a way that teachers feel is not ‘taking away’ or taking time from subject areas. Although some research supports the notion that “technology in schools wastes time, money, and childhood itself by speeding up the pace and cutting down on essential learning experiences.” (Cordes & Miller 2000; Healy 1998) Some Montessori teachers feel that this is true. They feel that if they are using technology they are loosing time in curical other areas. How could this statement and their beliefs hold true if we viewed technology the way it was meant to be viewed and used in the classroom? I believe that to reach this common understanding we need to understand that technology is not meant to stand on its own. Using technology alone will not teach wonderful lessons in either program.

Technology is meant as a compliment to classroom activities not a choice that takes away from other learning. “Technology adds to the set of tools available for children to use and adapt... and to help express themselves, verbally, visually and emotionally.” (Brass p.10) This is where our teaching staff is having difficulty. I believe that if we understood and employed some guiding principals when integrating technology into our classroom environments teacher’s beliefs would change. They would see technology as not something that takes away from other subjects, but a tool to support different learning styles. The question that should lead our focus becomes, how do we use technology to best support our student’s learning in our own unique environments?

Five Element

Framework for

Teachers to

Consider:Rosen and Jaruszewicz

suggest that for technology integration to be successful teachers must do the following

1. Become technology literate themselves

2. Understanding the development and cultural characteristics and particular needs and interests of their students as related to technology.

3. Make responsible choices about access to technology equipment and media.

4. Know how to scaffold children’s technology exposure and experiences with appropriate expectations and strategies.

5. Engage in regular documentation and assessment of children’s emerging technology competencies.

Creating an Environment that Supports TechnologyOur Progressive and Montessori physical environments are constructed very

differently. Our multi-age Montessori classrooms have extensive hands on materials that stimulate their students learning. All of their materials for the year are placed out on their shelves. They use their materials in a specific way to teach their Montessori curriculum. They have nothing on their classroom walls because they believe that it distracts students from their learning task. Everything a Montessori classroom is reality based. Our Montessori environments try to embody Maria Montessori’s views on children’s learning which is “education is not something which the teacher does, but that it is a natural process which develops spontaneously in the human being. It is not acquired by listening to words, but in virtue of experiences in which the child acts on his environment. The teachers’s task is not to talk, but to prepare and arrange a series of motives for cultural activity in a special environment for a child.” (Maria Montessori, The Absorbent Mind www. montessori.org)

In a Progressive classroom we have materials to stimulate learning but we introduce them gradually throughout the year and they are used in multiple ways. Typically, you will see desks or tables in classrooms for students to complete their learning and there will be more posters or work displayed on the wall. The pictures on page 4 and 5 illustrate the physical difference between the two classroom settings. Although our two environments are inherently different, I believe that it shouldn’t mean that our support and use of technology cannot be tackled the same way. To begin, our staff needs to acknowledge some basic principals when using technology in their environments. The Education of Young Children state that learning environments that embrace technology must focus on the following:

1) embed authenticity2) emphasize knowledge construction- to me a classroom environment that

supports technology does so in a way that it doesn’t just emphasize knowledge construction for students but also for parents. I think our focus for technology integration into our classroom environment should reach beyond the walls of our classroom and extend to our parent community. At out school, I feel that we have been limited in our vision in both streams. We only thinking about the affects of technology on our students.

“Students in my class like using the computer and the programs, which is a factor in their interesting and drive to complete their work and projects. They also enjoy exploring how these programs can enhance presentations and projects. These programs also add a "professional" or "grown up" look and feel to their work which they enjoy.” Progressive Teacher

Progressive Classroom Environment

The home school relationship is one based on open communication and sharing. What better way to foster that then with an environment that uses technology as a form of communication no matter what stream students are in. For example, this year my class has our own classroom website just for parents. I update it weekly with pictures, student learning and important information for parents. I have found from first hand experience that it has allowed parents to become more involved in their child’s learning.

3) use open ended learning4) include student cooperation and

collaboration- from the survey, both parents and teachers expressed concerns over students so focused with technology that it takes away from both student social interaction and teachers interacting with their students. Drawing on my own classroom experience, I have seen the opposite. When my students are using laptops they are very helpful to each other. They help one another figure what to press or what to do. Also, I never have my students working alone with any technology. Putting students in pairs encourages social interactions and participation. Once again this comes back to the role of the teacher who is guiding students while using technology.

The social interaction is definitely there but it is in a different context than you would see on the playground. I think that if teachers have an environment that is using technology authentically then the student cooperation and collaboration piece will look after itself. “Technology cannot and should not replace human interaction or relationships... properly used however, computers and software can serve as a catalyst for social and conversations related to children’s work. (Clements &Nastasi,1993 Technology In Early Childhood Education).

5) integrate mixed ability levels and differentiated instruction where appropriate and possible. (Early Childhood Education Journal 2009 37:209-218) What I have had success with in my environment is scaffolding different learning through a program called Kidspiration. I have found through this program and integrating diverse groups of students it has allowed me to see the different

learning styles of my students and give some students an opportunity to shine and become and expert.

By no means am I suggesting that I am an expert at integrating technology into my classroom environment. The goal of stating this criteria and giving my own experiences is to allow teachers from both streams to see how they can be interpreted to fit your unique environment. Maybe then we could join together to begin to view technology as not an intrusion into their classroom environments, but as a tool to enhance their student’s learning journey.

Developmentally Appropriate? A major concerned voiced by some Montessori teachers at our school support the idea that the integration of technology into the classroom shouldn’t happen until after grade three because it doesn’t support development for young children. I wanted to explore this notion further. I started my research at the provincial level. I quickly found that the province of Alberta disagrees with the idea of limited technology before grade three. According to the Alberta Education website, Alberta is considered a leader in the use and support of technology in education. In fact, Alberta education announced that over a three year period 18.5 million dollars would be spent towards improving the integration of technology into classrooms. This commitment alone allows educators to clearly see that the province not only supports integration but embraces its possibilities in our early childhood education system. (http://education.alberta.ca/admin/technology/classroom.aspx) In my opinion, the province is making it known that technology is developmentally appropriate for young students no matter what stream of education they choose. As educators I believe we too need to jump on board to support this.

When I analyzed the teacher responses we can see that one of the main reasons teachers in the Montessori program are struggling with the idea of technology is because they believe it takes away from the hands on fine motor work they do in their classroom which is so important for early childhood students. The believe that children need that hands on work to develop their skills properly. Honestly, I can see their point

however, I believe there is room for both in a balanced approach. If we look back at the foundations of developmentally appropriate practices in early childhood education we run into names like Paiget, Erikson, Dewey, Vygotsky and in regards to our school, Maria Montessori. These influential figures formed the beliefs that currently educators have around children’s development and early childhood education. Early childhood education is still deeply rooted in the discovery by those figures who suggest in a number of different ways that “practice is appropriate when children are encouraged to construct their own knowledge through interactions with the physical, social and cultural environments” (Rosen & Jaruszewicz,p.163). The foundation has been laid for teaching practices with young children, however, I do believe that these principals are open for interpretation and need to be adapted by educators to fit the current environment and suit the changing needs of their students. Teachers need to consider the physical, social and cultural interactions of their students. The parent survey alone allows us to see how important technology is to both our students and parents. Our personal beliefs aside, don’t we owe it to our students to follow their interest and adapt our practice to suit their learning styles?

If the mindset at our school is going to change we need to understand the development appropriate perspective that supports technology. Rosen and Jaruszewicz lay out a five element framework for educators to use when implementing developmentally appropriate technology use. This framework states that teachers should:

1) Become technologically literate themselves

I feel like this really is a non issue for our staff. We are aware what’s out there for technology, the question we have is how do we use it in our classrooms? The teacher survey indicated that not one teacher was concerned about their own knowledge or comfort level of technology which goes against what most researchers claim educators face. This leads me to believe that our confidence level or knowledge isn’t a problem at our school.

2) Understanding the development and cultural characteristics and particular needs and interests of their students as related to technology.

More often than not in our school, myself and other teachers simply used technology through utilizing Microsoft Word to type up finish work. Although, Microsoft Word has its benefits it doesn’t really harness our students need to explore their own interests.

3) Make responsible choices about access to technology equipment and media.

Our school is really fortunate because we have a Smartboard in every classroom but two. We have two video cameras and three digital cameras teachers can sign out. We also have a mobile lap top cart with twenty lap tops and ten iPads. With one hundred and sixty three students and a small teaching staff there is no problem having access to technology. Again, when going through the teacher survey, access to technology was never an issue that was expressed.

4) Know how to scaffold children’s technology exposure and experiences with appropriate expectations and strategies.

5) Engage in regular documentation and assessment of children’s emerging technology competencies.

Another issue that seems to be causing problems is whether or not technology use at an early age has a positive or negative affect on motor development skills. The research is overwhelming for support of technology helping fine and gross motor development in children who have disabilities, however, what are the impacts if any for other children? The research in this area is very subjective with too many variables to make any concrete general assumptions. This is definitely an area that needs more attention and research. Here’s what we do know according to child development. We know that children develop their fine and gross motor skills at different rates depending on a number of variables including their environment. I wanted to once again draw from my own teaching experience to look at this issue in a different way. In my class this year I have a little boy with both fine and gross motor difficulties. Writing and forming letters is painful and incredibly time consuming for him. He has great ideas for his stories and is extremely expressive orally, however, that is lost when he is asked to write his ideas down. We have used recording programs and word processing programs to help get his ideas recorded so other people can experience his imagination. Although there is yet to be research that suggests technology is having a positive or negative affect on motor development, from the example we can see the other side of helping children who struggle with fine and gross motor skills. Davis and Shade 1994 state that “a word processor allows them to compose and revise text without being distracted by the fine motor aspects of letter formation.” (Technology in Early Childhood Education June 2001). I couldn’t agree more.

Social Constructivist ModelThe current research that supports

use of technology in an early childhood setting follows the social constructivist approach. As illustrated through the parents survey, the 21st century student comes from a social environments that is immersed with digital technologies at a young age. Social constructivism is a theory that is described as “a theory of

knowing that emphasizes the role each person plays in constructing his or her own knowledge rather than absorbing directly from the environment. The focus is on children’s creation of knowledge rather than what others consider important knowledge. This occurs as the individual mentally and often physically acts on the environment” (Branscombe and colleagues 2003, p.10). This theory highlights the importance of the child interacting with their environment putting them in charge of their learning. To ensure that the child’s learning is authentic educators need to take into consideration the child’s social experiences presented in their environment before entering school. To not acknowledge our students experiences in the digital world is to ignore a major interest in their home, community and cultural setting. In my opinion, a teacher that supports the constructivist model would be a teacher who would challenge their student’s pervious knowledge while embracing technology as a tool to support learning not as an end goal. (Springer,p.210)

Conclusion

If our teachers from both streams applied the constructivist model to technology integration, maybe it would allow both groups to become more united and have common pedagogy. If we strived to become a staff that supported the constructivist model of thinking towards technology and approached technology in our environment using the Education of Young Children standards, I feel that the integration of technology between Progressive and Montessori would change. After all, we are dealing with educating the same sort of child who is now in a world where technology is present. Our students need the same exposure and implementation if we are to prepare them for the real world. Whether they are Progressive or Montessori, both students enter into the same outside world. My hopes is that teachers at our school can come together over some ideas presented in this paper to change the course of technology integration at our school.

References

Burnett, C. (2010). Technology and Literacy in Early Childhood Educational Settings: A Review of Research. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy. (2010). 10:3 247-270.

Keengwe, J. & Onchwari, G. (2009). Technology and Early Childhood Education: A Technology Integration Professional Development Model for Practicing Teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal. (2009). 37:209-218.

Lisenbee, P. (2009). Whiteboards and Websites. Digital Tools for the Early Childhood Curriculum. Young Children, 92-95.

Parette, H., Quesenberry, A. & Blum, C. (2009). Missing the Boat with Technology Usage in Early Childhood Settings: A 21st Century View of Developmentally Appropriate Practice. Early Childhood Education Journal. (2010). 37:335-343.

Scoter, J. & Boss, S. (2002) Learners, Language, and Technology: Making Connections That Support Literacy. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory Child & Family.

Scoter, Judy & Ellis, Debbie. (2001). Technology in Early Childhood Education: Finding the Balance.

Rosen, D. & Jaruszewicz C. (2008). Developmentally Appropriate Technology Use and Early Childhood Teacher Education. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education. (2009). 30:162-171.

Wang, C., Jaruszewicz C., Rosen, D., Berson, I., Bailey, M., Harlte, L., Griebling, S., Buckleitner, W., Blagojevic, B & Robinson, L. (2008). Meaningful Technology Integration in Early Learning Environments. Young Children. (2008).

http://www.statscan.gc.ca

http://education.alberta.ca/admin/technology/classroom.aspx