Understanding Technology Literacy: A Framework for Evaluating Educational Technology Integration

TechTrends

Volumn 55, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 45-52

  Davies, Randall S ^a  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Educational Technology; Technology Integration; Technology Literacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 80051523947     PISSN: 87563894     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11528-011-0527-3     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn't happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519-546.
2. Burgess-Limerick, R., Abernathy, B., & Limerick, B. (1994). Identification of underlying assumptions is an integral part of research: An example from motor control. Theory & Psychology, 4, 139-146.
3. Davies, R., & Linton, J. (2008a). Understanding Dispositional Dissonance. Paper presented at the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts & Letters Annual Meeting at Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI.
4. Davies, R., Sprague, C., & New, C. (2008b) Integrating Technology into a Science Classroom: An evaluation of inquiry-based technology integration. In D. W. Sunal, E. L. Wright, & C. Sundberg (Eds.), The Impact of Technology and the Laboratory on K-16 Science Learningseries: Research in Science Education (pp. 207-237).
5. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc. Eisenberg, M. B., & Johnson, D. (2002) Learning and teaching information technology: Computer skills incontext. ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 465377.
6. Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.
7. Hall, B., & Khan, B. (2003). Adoption of new technology. NBER Working Paper. Retrieved from http://papers. ssrn. com/sol3/papers. cfm?abstract_id = 410656.
8. Hansen, J. W. (2003) To change perceptions of technology programs. Journal of Technology Studies, 29, 16-19. International Society for Technology in Education. (2007). National educational technology standards for students. Retrieved from http://www. iste. org/AM/Template. cfm?Section=NETS.
9. International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National educational technology standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www. iste. org/AM/Template. cfm?Section=NETS.
10. Leu, D. J., & Kinzer, C. K. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction with networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(1), 108-127.
11. Leu, D. J. (2006). New literacies, reading research, and the challenges of change: A Deictic perspective. (NRC Presidential Address). In J. Hoffman, D. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, & B. Maloch (Eds.) The 55th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. (1-20). Milwaukee, WI: National Reading Conference.
12. McMillan, S. (1996). Literacy and computer literacy: Definitions and comparisons. Computer & Education, 27(3-4), 161-170.
13. McMillan-Culp, K., Honey, M., & Mandinach, E. (2005). A retrospective on twenty years of educational technology policy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(3), 279-307.
14. Miller, M. D., Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (2009). Measurement and assessment in teaching (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
15. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogicalcontent knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
16. Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroomtechnology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 23(4), 40-42. Retrieved from http://loticonnection. com/pdf/LoTiFrameworkNov95. pdf.
17. National Research Council Committee on Information Technology Literacy. (1999). Being fluent with information technology. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
18. Peck, C., Cuban, L., & Kirkpatrick, H. (2003). High-tech's high hopes meet student realities. Education Digest, 67(8), 47-54.
19. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-2.
20. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (ed.), The handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 102-119), New York: MacMillan.
21. Rogers, P. (2000). Barriers to adopting emerging technologies in education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(4), 455-472.
22. Russell, M., Bebell, D., O'Dwyer, L., & O'Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 297-310.
23. Technology in Schools Task Force. (2002). Technology in schools: Suggestions, tools, and guidelines for assessing technology in elementary and secondary education. Retrieved from http://nces. ed. gov/pubs2003/tech_schools/chapter7. asp.
24. Topper, A. (2004). How are we doing? Using self-assessment to measure changing teacher technology literacy within a graduate educational technology program. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(3), 303-317.
25. U. S. Department of Education (2001). Enhancing Education Through Technology, SEC. 2402 - purposes and goals. Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Retrieved from http://www2. ed. gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg34. html#sec2401.
26. U. S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2002). No child left behind: A desktop reference. Retrieved from https://www. ed. gov/admins/lead/account/nclbreference/page. html.
27. Woolfolk, A. (2008). Educational Psychology, (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.