Teachers' perceptions of integrating information and communication technologies into literacy instruction: A national survey in the United States

Reading Research Quarterly

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 312-333

  Hutchison, Amy ^a   Reinking, David ^b  

^a IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862514621     PISSN: 00340553     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/RRQ.002     Document Type: Review

References (65)

1. Angers, J., & Machtmes, K. (2005). An ethnographic-case study of beliefs, context factors, and practices of teachers integrating technology. Qualitative Report, 10(4), 771-794.
2. 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.
3. Baumann, J., & Bason, J. (2011). Survey research. In N. Duke & M. Mallette (Eds.), Literacy research methodologies (2nd ed., pp. 404-426). New York: Guilford.
4. Becker, H.J. (1994). How exemplary computer-using teachers differ from other teachers: Implications for realizing the potential of computers in schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(3), 291-321.
5. Becker, H.J. (1999). Internet use by teachers: Conditions of professional use and teacher-directed student use. Teaching, learning, and computing: 1998 National Survey. (Report No. 1). Irvine: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California.
6. Bruce, B.C., & Rubin, A. (1993). Electronic quills: A situated evaluation of using computers for writing in the classroom. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2002). Instruments for assessing the impact of technology in education. Computers in the Schools, 18 (2), 5-25.
8. Clark, C.M., & Peterson, P.L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan.
9. Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. (2008). Central issues in new literacies and new literacies research. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear & D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 1-22). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Craig, D. (1997). Telecurricular teaching and learning the impact of world-wide web access on the instructional process. Telecommunications in Education, 8(3), 6-8.
11. Crawford, S.D., Couper, M.P., & Lamias, M.J. (2001). Web surveys: Perception of burden. Social Science Computer Review, 19 (2), 146-162.
12. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Dillman, D., Smyth, J., & Christian, L.M. (2009). Internet, mail and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
14. Dillman, D.A. (2007). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
15. Dockstader, J. (1999). Teachers of the 21st century know the what, why and how of technology integration. T.H.E. Journal, 26(6), 73-74.
16. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. (1993). An introduction to bootstrap. London: Chapman and Hall.
17. Ertmer, P. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39. (Pubitemid 41806973)
18. Ertmer, P., Addison, P., Lane, M., Ross, E., & Woods, D. (1999). Examining teachers' beliefs about the role of technology in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1), 54-72.
19. Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
20. Ertmer, P., Gopalakrishnan, S., & Ross, E.M. (2001). Technologyusing teachers: Comparing perceptions of exemplary technology use to best practices [Electronic version]. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 33(5).
21. Everitt, B.S., & Dunn, G.G. (1991). Applied multivariate data analysis. London: Edward Arnold.
22. Fatemi, E. (1999). Building the digital curriculum: Summary. Education Week, 19(4), 5-8.
23. Garner, R., & Gillingham, M.G. (1996). Internet communications in six classrooms: Conversations across time, space, and culture. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2009). Teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416.
25. Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary school teachers' educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1499-1509.
26. Honan, E. (2008). Barriers to teachers using digital texts of literacy classrooms. Literacy, 42(1), 36-43.
27. Hughes, J.E., Kerr, S.P., & Ooms, A. (2005). Content-focused technology inquiry groups: Cases of teacher learning and technology integration. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32 (4), 367-379. (Pubitemid 41687227)
28. Hutchison, A., & Reinking, D. (2010). A national survey of barriers to integrating information and communication technologies into literacy instruction. 59th yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Milwaukee, WI: National Reading Conference.
29. International Reading Association. (2009). New literacies and 21stcentury technologies: A position statement of the International Reading Association. Newark, DE: Author.
30. Karchmer, R. (2001). The journey ahead: Thirteen teachers report how the Internet influences literacy and literacy instruction in their K-12 classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 442-466. (Pubitemid 33610363)
31. Kist, W. (2007). Basement new literacies: Dialogue with a first-year teacher. English Journal, 97(1), 43-48.
32. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.
33. Labbo, L.D., & Reinking, D. (1999). Negotiating the multiple realities of technology in literacy research and instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(4), 478-492.
34. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Suffolk, UK: Open University Press.
35. Lawless, K., & Pellegrino, J. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575-614.
36. Leu, D. (2006). New literacies, reading research, and the challenges of change: A deictic perspective. In J. Hoffman, D. Schallert, M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy & B. Malloch (Eds.), 55th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 1-20). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
37. Leu, D., Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. (2004). Towards a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In R.B. Rudell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570-1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
38. Leu, D., & Reinking, D. (1996). Bringing insights from reading research to research on electronic learning environments. In H. van Oostendorp (Ed.), Cognitive aspects of electronic text processing (pp. 43-75). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
39. Leu, D., Reinking, D., Carter, A., Castek, J.M., Coiro, J.L., & Henry, L.A., et al. (2007, April) Defining online reading comprehension: Using think aloud verbal protocols to refine a preliminary model of Internet reading comprehension processes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
40. Leu, D., Reinking, D., Hutchison, A., McVerry, G., O'Byrne, I., & Zawilinski, L. (2009, May). Internet reciprocal teaching (IRT): A research-based model for teaching the new literacies of online reading comprehension. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the International Reading Association, Minneapolis, MN.
41. Lewis, C., & Fabos, B. (2005). Instant messaging, literacies, and social identities. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 470-501. (Pubitemid 41560608)
42. Mallinckrodt, B., Abraham, T.W., Wei, M., & Russell, D.W. (2006). Advance in testing statistical significance of mediation effects. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3), 372-378. (Pubitemid 44167243)
43. McEneaney, J. (2006). Agent-based literacy theory. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(3), 352-371.
44. Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2007). Mplus 5.2 [Computer software]. Los Angeles: Statmodel.
45. National Center for Educational Statistics. (2003). Internet access in public schools and classrooms: 1994-2002. Retrieved June 27, 2011, from nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004011.pdf
46. Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Penuel, W.R., Boscardin, C.K., Masyn, K., & Crawford, V. (2007). Teaching with student response systems in elementary and secondary education settings: A survey study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(4), 315-346.
48. Raine, L., & Horrigan, J. (2005). A decade of adoption: How the Internet has woven itself into American life. Retrieved April 20, 2010, from www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2005/How-the-internethas-woven-itself-into-American- life.aspx.
49. Rea, L., & Parker, R. (2005). Designing and conducting survey research: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
50. Reinking, D. (1992). Differences between electronic and printed texts: An agenda for research. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 1(1), 11-24.
51. Reinking, D. (1998). Synthesizing technological transformations of literacy in a post typographic world. In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, L.D. Labbo & R. Kieffer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology (pp. xi-xxx). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
52. Reinking, D. (2001). Multimedia and engaged reading in a digital world. In L. Verhoeven & C.E. Snow (Eds.), Literacy and motivation: Reading engagement in individuals and groups (pp. 195-221). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
53. Reinking, D., & Bradley, B.A. (2008). On formative and design experiments: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York: Teachers College Press.
54. Reinking, D., Labbo, L.D., & McKenna, M.C. (2000). From assimilation to accommodation: A developmental framework for integrating digital technologies into literacy research and instruction. Journal of Research in Reading, 23(2), 110-122.
55. Schaefer, D., & Dillman, D. (1998). Development of a standard e-mail methodology: Results of an experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62(3), 378-397. (Pubitemid 128376625)
56. Scott, S.M., Chovanec, D.M., & Young, B. (1993). Philosophyin-action in university teaching. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Adult Education Research Conference, University Park: Penn State University.
57. Shrout, P.E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422-445.
58. SPSS for Windows. (2010). Rel. 19.0. [Computer software]. Chicago: SPSS Inc.
59. Stolle, E. (2008). Teachers, literacy, & technology: Tensions, complexities, conceptualizations & practice. In Y. Kim, V. Risko, D. Compton, D. Dickinson, M. Hundley, R. Jimenez, K. Leander & D. Wells-Rowe (Eds.), 57th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 56-69). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
60. Sue, V.M., & Ritter, L.A. (2007). Conducting online surveys. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
61. United States Department of Education. (2003). Federal funding for educational technology and how it is used in the classroom: A summary of findings from the integrated studies of educational technology. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Under Secretary, Policy and Program Studies Service.
62. Warschauer, M., Knobel, M., & Stone, L.A. (2004). Technology and equity in schooling: Deconstructing the digital divide. Educational Policy, 18(4), 562-588. (Pubitemid 39159721)
63. Wells, J., & Lewis, L. (2006). Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms: 1994-2005. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
64. Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers' use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 165-205.
65. Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104 (3), 482-515.