Physical science connected classrooms…
Physical Science Connected Classrooms: Case Studies
ID: 27079
Journal: Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching (JCMST)
Abstract:
Case-study descriptions of secondary and middle school classrooms in diverse contexts provide
examples of how teachers implement connected classroom technology to facilitate formative
assessment in science instruction. Connected classroom technology refers to a networked system
of handheld devices designed for classroom use. Teachers were surprised at the knowledge they
gathered about student learning in connected classrooms. They recognized that their students
were better informed about their own learning and believed that use of the technology increased
student engagement in on-task behavior. Connected classroom technology reduced barriers for
formative assessment and informed teachers and students about classroom learning achievements
and challenges.
Contact
Karen Irving USA
irving.8@osu.edu
Authors
1. Karen Irving
The Ohio State University
USA
irving.8@osu.edu
2. Vehbi Sanalan
The Ohio State University
Turkey
sanalan.1@osu.edu
3. Melissa Shirley
The Ohio State University
USA
shirley.37@osu.edu
1 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Introduction
Since the 1960s, educators have explored electronic audience response system (ARS)
technology for use in college lecture halls as a way to connect students and instructors (Judson &
Sawada, 2002). Although students enthusiastically endorsed the early systems, initial studies in
biology (Bessler, 1969), logic and mathematics (Brown, 1972), and chemistry (Casanova, 1971)
indicated a lack of significant correlation between student learning gains and the use of ARS
coupled with traditional lecture pedagogy (Bapst, 1971).
More contemporary work broadens the investigative lens to include effective pedagogical
practice and includes more promising reports. Studies of ARS in classrooms conducted in the
1990s and later reveal increases in student attendance and participation (e.g. Burnstein &
Lederman, 2001), student comprehension (e.g. Hake, 1998; Slain, Abate, Hodges, Stamatakis &
Wolak, 2004), student engagement (Dufresne, Gerace, Leonard, Mestre, & Wenk, 1996),
collaborative learning (Mazur, 1997) and student satisfaction (Judson & Sawada, 2002). While
use of ARS with traditional lecture style teaching does not correlate with increased student
achievement, technology-facilitated interactive engagement in ARS lecture classes has been
shown to correlate with student conceptual gains (Judson & Sawada, 2002).
Although a variety of studies have been completed at the university level, limited work
has been reported on the use of ARS technology in K-12 classrooms. A study in mathematics
classrooms revealed the potential of connected classroom technology to support formative
assessment by facilitating the task of gathering information about individual students and rapid
data aggregation (Roschelle, Penuel, & Abrahamson, 2004). Recent research results on
connected classroom technology (a type of ARS) with a large-scale field trial using a randomassignment, control group, cross-over design indicates that student achievement in algebra 1
2 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
connected classrooms is significantly higher than a control group of students in classrooms
without the technology (Pape, et al., 2008).
Connected classroom technology refers to a networked system of handheld devices
combined with software specifically designed for classroom use. Networked systems with these
characteristics include a variety of ARS and classroom communication systems (Fies &
Marshall, 2006; Roschelle, Penuel, & Abrahamson, 2004). The participants in this study utilize
the Navigator™ technology produced by Texas Instruments which allows teachers to wirelessly
communicate with students’ handheld graphing calculators.
Use of connected classroom technology in a secondary classroom requires teachers to
adjust their practice, but changing teacher practice involves more than simply providing teachers
with new tools. Studies report that attempts to reform classroom practices have generally been
unsuccessful and failed to lead to long-term change (Cuban, 1998; Priestley, 2005). Cuban
highlights the critical importance of the teacher in reform efforts aimed at increasing student
achievement. Likewise, Priestley acknowledges the power of teachers as the mediator of
classroom change and the importance of teacher adaptation and engagement in reform efforts.
Priestley and Sime (2005) apply Archer’s (1988) social theory as a framework to
understand school innovation. Archer describes both the cultural system and socio-cultural
interactions within the culture as important aspects of school change. Archer uses the terms
‘morphogenesis’ and ‘morphostasis’ to describe change and lack of change respectively in a
cultural setting. Complementarities and contradictions between an innovation and the existing
culture draw particular attention in a change context. In some cases, the ideas and knowledge of
the change system are complementary to the former culture and are utilized to promote change.
3 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
In other contexts, the new ideas create tension with existing ideas, norms, and practices.
Persistent change is more challenging in these cultural environments (Archer, 1988).
Theoretical framework
While social theory provides a framework to interpret teacher classroom practice, the
success of an educational innovation depends on the distinctive ecology of the classroom.
Twenty-first century classrooms are characterized by the inherently challenging tasks of both
managing and instructing large numbers of non-volunteer students. In order for school change to
succeed, the new ideas must accommodate both the attitudes and values of the teachers
implementing the change as well as the structural realities of school, including staffing
considerations, scheduling issues, classroom structure and systems for testing and evaluation
(Priestley & Sime, 2005). Reforms may be consistent with teacher views, but may not be
congruent with the underlying school structures. Three dimensions describe the practicality of a
particular change and may influence the success of a reform effort (Doyle & Ponder, 1977):
Congruence with teacher’s values and practice; Instrumentality, compatibility with the existing
school structures; and Cost/Benefits, whether the reward is worth the effort.
This practicality
construct, combined with the ecological framework of the classroom, serves as an interpretive
tool for understanding how teachers integrate connected classroom technology in their teaching.
Almost every state employs some accountability measure to determine student
performance (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2000). However, these summative tests
often fail to provide teachers with useful information to improve student learning. Unlike
summative assessment, formative assessment occurs every day in the classroom. According to
Cheung (2006), formative assessment is “the process used by teachers and students to recognize
and respond to student learning in order to enhance that learning during the learning” (p 61).
4 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
When questioning and feedback are frequent and involve students actively in reflecting on what
they know and how they learn, and when assessment data are used to inform and adjust the
course of instruction, formative assessment has been correlated with large gains in student
achievement (e.g. Bell & Cowie, 2001; Black & Wiliam, 1998a, 1998b; Cowie & Bell, 1999).
Researchers distinguish different kinds of formative assessment practices. Bell and
Cowie (2001) describe both: a) interactive formative assessments – characterized by interactions
between students and teacher during the lesson in response to specific classroom ecology, as well
as b) planned formative assessment – pre- or mid-lesson assessments prepared before the lesson
began for specific purposes such as revealing prior knowledge or midpoint progress checking.
Ruiz-Primo and Furtak (2007) describe informal formative assessment practices in inquiry
lessons as teacher information gathering about students’ developing understanding as the lesson
proceeds. Furtak describes a continuum of practice from formal curriculum embedded formative
assessment to informal on-the-fly assessment (2006). Studies show, however, that formative
assessment use by classroom teachers is one of the weakest aspects of teacher practice
(Assessment Reform Group, 1999; Daws & Singh, 1996, 1999).
The authors of this paper view the inclusion of connected classroom technology as a
cultural change in educational settings. The research questions addressed in this study are: What
features characterize the school contexts where connected classroom technology has been
adopted by physical science teachers? In what ways is the use of connected classroom
technology congruent with physical science teaching? What benefits do physical science
teachers identify for use of connected classroom technology? In particular, do physical science
classroom teachers identify aspects of formative assessment as benefits of connected
classrooms?
5 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Connected Classrooms
Connected classrooms are designed to facilitate student-teacher communication. The
Navigator™ utilized in this project is a multi-faceted technology that includes student handheld
graphing calculators attached to a hub, wireless communication from the hub to an access point
wired to the teacher’s computer, and a software management package (Figure 1). The
Navigator™ features four components: 1) Activity Center – students may contribute ordered
pairs, equations, or spreadsheet style lists to a shared workspace; 2) Quick Poll - an audience
response system that allows teachers to pose on-the-spot questions with a variety of student
response choices (forced-choice or opened-ended); 3) Screen capture – teachers view and/or
display a snapshot of students’ calculator screens; 4) Learning Check & Class Analysis – allows
distribution of teacher-created assessments; collection, aggregation and scoring of forced-answer
choice questions; and production of a class response slide show. Additionally, probeware
devices (e. g. motion detectors, temperature probes, etc.) can be used to gather data. These data
can be sent to the teacher’s computer and with Activity Center may be aggregated and displayed
to produce class sets for group analysis.
--------Figure 1------Methodology
The results presented here are based on data gathered as part of a larger research project
(Classroom Connectivity in Promoting Mathematics and Science Achievement [CCMS] Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Grant R305K050045). The
overall CCMS project design is a randomized cross-over trial where the control group is exposed
to the intervention sequentially. The larger study employs a mixed-methods approach using
quantitative data for statistical analysis as well as qualitative data for in-depth analysis of
6 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
connected classrooms. The main focus of the CCMS study is to examine the impact of connected
classroom technology with interactive pedagogy and professional development on mathematics
and science achievement, teacher professional growth, student self-regulated learning and
students’ dispositions toward mathematics and science. This paper presents case studies from
three purposively selected physical science teachers who have completed their first year of the
CCMS study as members of the experimental group.
Intervention
The intervention consists of four parts: 1) provision of connected classroom technology;
2) professional development consisting of a weeklong summer institute held at The Ohio State
University; 3) online web-based training and discussion forum for the teacher community; and 4)
follow-up professional development at the annual Teachers Teaching with Technology
International Conference for two years. For a more detailed description of the connected
classroom technology and the professional development program, see Sanalan, Irving, Pape &
Owens (2008) and Pape, Irving, Owens, Abrahamson & Demana (2008).
Data sources & analysis
Technology Use and Professional Development Survey
This survey included 85 Likert-style questions (4 or 5 point scales) targeted at five
constructs: Ability to use computers (Qs 1-10); technology use in science education (Qs 11-39);
general technology skills (Qs 40-51); recently completed professional development (Qs 52-62);
and perceived science content knowledge expertise (Qs 63-85).
7 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Telephone interviews (Autumn & Spring)
Participants were interviewed by telephone in the autumn and spring of the academic
year. A telephone interview protocol was established and reviewed by five members of the
research team. The Year 1 Autumn Interview included seven questions and probed initial
experiences in the connected classroom. Interviews were conducted by the first author, lasted
from 20 to 40 minutes, and were audio-recorded. Participants were asked to describe the set-up
and installation of their connected classroom systems and their initial successes and challenges.
In addition, participants responded to questions about component use, student-liking, planning,
and lessons incorporating connected classroom technology.
Spring telephone interviews included 17 questions that probed teacher practice more
deeply. Interviews conducted by the first author lasted 30-45 minutes and were audio-recorded.
Questions explored availability of connected classroom technology and supporting devices, use
frequency, successes and challenges, descriptions of component use, comfort level, studentliking, lesson planning and implementation, classroom atmosphere, perceived pedagogy
implementation, and professional development plans and presentations.
Classroom observations
Each teacher was observed teaching two science classes on two successive days, for a
total of four class periods per teacher. Each lesson was videotaped and transcribed. Original
videotapes were viewed in order to capture specific details such as exact wordings of Quick Poll
questions and open-ended student responses. In addition, transcripts were annotated with
information regarding nonverbal actions such as gestures, physical movements, and screen/board
displays. Artifacts such as student handouts were collected and catalogued.
8 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Post observation interviews
Post observation interviews lasted 30-40 minutes and followed an established protocol.
Questions were designed to probe teacher planning and implementation of the observed lessons.
In particular the teacher was asked to describe lesson objectives, to detail pre-planned formative
assessment intentions, to recall interactive formative assessment, and to reflect on the progress of
the lessons. Since each teacher was observed teaching the same lesson twice, interviewers asked
about changes that occurred between the first and second teaching.
Student focus groups
A student focus group (4 to 10 students) was interviewed during each observation
sequence. Researchers followed an interview protocol that included questions about the
observed lesson, about other uses of connected classroom technology, and about student attitudes
and opinions regarding the technology. Focus group interviews lasted about 20 minutes, were
audio-taped and transcribed for subsequent analysis.
Physical Science Achievement Test
A 46-item physical science achievement test was created by the research team for the
larger CCMS project. The process of instrument creation started with a thorough review of the
National Science Education Standards, the TIMSS standards, McREL standards and NEAP
standards for middle grade physical science concepts. After identifying overlap and differences
between these standards documents, the research team examined the state standards for the 12
most populous US states. Topics included on 80% of the standards documents for middle school
science were included in the final instrument. Released TIMSS, NAEP, and state standardized
test items were carefully selected to align with the topics identified from the standards analysis.
In addition, items were selected representing both higher and lower order Bloom’s Taxonomy
9 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
categories. The instrument was administered in a pilot trial to a total of 269 ninth grade students
enrolled in ninth grade physical science classes from two different high schools, one urban and
one suburban/rural. The test was administered in May/June after a full year of physical science
instruction.
Completed tests were machine scored and subjected to item-response theory (IRT)
analysis. All IRT analyses were conducted using BILOG MG, using a 3PL model. For each test,
the IRT analyses produced estimates of item discrimination (), item difficulty (), and guessing
(c). On the basis of these results, four items were removed from this instrument as they had low
correlation with other items on the test and their removal would result in a higher reliability.
These four items also demonstrated other undesirable item characteristics, such as a low
discrimination index (1 item), very high difficulty (2 items), and both a high difficulty level and
a high index of guessing (1 item). The final instrument contains items that perform in a broad
range of difficulty levels, allowing it to more precisely measure differences in student abilities.
The overall reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) of the instrument is 0.88. The final instrument
contains 16 chemistry items, 16 physics items and 10 earth/environmental science related items.
Participants
Nine science teachers and their students participated in the science experimental group.
From this group, three physical science teachers were purposively selected for this study to
explore teacher practice in significantly different teaching contexts. Table 1 summarizes
differences in grade levels, school diversity and socio-economic conditions for students at the
three selected schools. These participants were particularly interesting because of their reported
successes in integrating connected classroom technology in widely divergent school contexts.
10 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Ms. S worked in a community with high socio-economic levels that was predominantly White.
Ms. C and Ms D worked in schools with more student diversity and with larger percentages of
students from economically disadvantaged homes.
In addition the three case study participants experienced different preservice preparation.
Ms. C, the most experienced teacher and the only one with a graduate degree, completed an
elementary teacher preparation program. Ms. S completed an undergraduate teacher preparation
program for secondary science teaching, and Ms. D’s undergraduate training was in animal
science (Table 2).
------Insert Table 1 about here-----------Insert Table 2 about here-----The case study participants reported differences in initial technology knowledge and
skills as well as science content knowledge. The values reported in Table 3 represent
percentages calculated using individual teacher scores divided by maximum possible positive
scores for each set of items. Higher values represent greater confidence in their technology
knowledge and skills, participation in professional development opportunities and confidence in
physics and chemistry content knowledge. Ms. C reported much lower initial comfort level with
educational technology and lower confidence in her knowledge of chemistry and physics than
the other two teachers.
------Insert Table 3 about here-----Results: Case studies
The descriptive multiple case study approach was selected as the optimal design to
compare the individual experiences of the participants (Yin, 2003). The researchers chose the
teacher as the focus of analysis and her experiences as the informative data set. Interview, focus
11 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
group, and observation transcripts as well as observation video and survey responses provided a
rich data set to determine the school context, instrumentality, congruence and cost/benefits for
each participant. NVivo 7™ software aided in the coding process of the extensive data set.
Provisional starter codes for the constructs of congruence, instrumentality (fit to school
structure), resource gathering, student liking, mentoring, cost/benefit, and student engagement
provided an a priori coding framework (Miles & Huberman, 1994). As researchers worked with
the coding process, discussions of coding category distinctions were negotiated and refined.
Multiple data sources offered evidence for triangulating the data to strengthen the credibility of
the findings. For example, classroom observations, student focus groups, and teacher interviews
provided three perspectives on teacher experience.
In the case studies that follow, the context of each participant’s teaching environment is
presented first. Next, we explore the structural support (instrumentality) afforded each
participant by their school communities. The third section of each case study describes the
teacher’s views of the congruence between prior teaching practice and current practice in a
connected classroom. Lastly, for each case study, we present results regarding costs and benefits
of using connected classroom technology in physical science classrooms.
Case study 1: Ms. C
Context
Ms. C, a veteran (18 years) teacher, completed an undergraduate program in elementary
education and held a graduate degree in curriculum and instruction. Of the three teachers
involved in this study, Ms. C reported the least prior experience and comfort level with
educational technology. Her first introduction to the graphing calculator occurred during the
week long summer institute for CCMS teachers.
12 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
For me technology is just overwhelming. It scares me….When it comes to the computer,
I tended to just go, oh, that’s not for me. (3050.TISp07.P17)
Ms. C also reported the lowest confidence in her science knowledge of the three case study
participants, which is perhaps not surprising given her elementary education preparation
program.
Ms. C taught in an inner-city school in a mid-size city in Ohio. According to Ms. C, the
students in the two class periods in our study represented the lowest achieving students in the
eighth grade. Ms. C worked with a special education co-teacher due to the many students in her
classes with individualized educational plans. Around 20 students were present in each of Ms.
Cs classes.
Instrumentality
Curriculum & resources.
Ms. C was teaching eighth grade science for the first time during her participation in the
CCMS project. Ms. C’s school adopted the FOSS (Full Option Science System, developed by the
Lawrence Hall of Science) curriculum and provided training for her to implement this
curriculum. Ms. C’s classroom was well-equipped with modern educational technology
including an interactive white board, a laptop computer with projector, an overhead projector,
audio speakers, and a device to project her calculator screen. Her students enjoyed access to a
class set of graphing calculators. Ms. C’s school purchased and installed her Navigator™ system
by the end of October.
Social support.
Ms. C enjoyed a school culture with strong support for educational technology
integration and a variety of readily available resources for mentoring and trouble shooting. In
Ms. C’s district, the science curriculum specialist had previously received training on Texas
13 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Instruments products. In addition, mathematics teachers at this middle school utilized the
Navigator™ system in their instructional program. In Ms. C’s words:
A lady in my district who is going to be a TI trainer…. was so excited … that she came
and set up my whole classroom and helped me. I have so much support from the math
people. Everyone in my building in the math department uses Navigator™ everyday.
(3050.TIAu06.P11)
Ms. C also benefited from her building principal’s strong support for educational
technology innovation in her school. During Ms. C’s first year in the study, her principal
attended the International Teachers Teaching with Technology professional conference.
Congruence
Ms. C found that the Navigator™ connected classroom system required her to make little
change in her teaching practice. She felt able to follow the school-mandated FOSS curriculum
and noted easy integration of the new technology.
My curriculum is to use the FOSS kits. [There are] a lot of hands on labs with those.
So… every time we do anything with data and graphing, we just automatically implement
it through the Navigator™. (3050.TIAu06.P23)
Ms. C also used the Quick Poll and Learning Check features for classroom practice of
state standardized test items. When district test results revealed that students were unable to
correctly interpret graphs, a goal was established to have science students analyze line graphs
every week. Ms. C used the Navigator™ system to comply with this specific learning goal. In
addition, Ms. C. kept a data base of state achievement test questions to use as review questions.
In her daily start-up, she selected one of these questions from the database and used the Quick
Poll feature of Navigator™ to present the question to her students. In summary, Ms. C perceived
good congruence between the connected classroom technology and her science curriculum, her
standardized test review practice, and district goals.
14 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Costs & Benefits
Costs.
The primary cost cited by Ms. C was learning to use a new educational technology tool in
her classroom. Her apprehension regarding computer based technologies and lack of familiarity
with graphing calculators represented potentially significant challenges for classroom
integration. Ms. C. reported that initially she was uncertain that she would be able to remember
enough from her summer institute to be successful implementing the technology.
Benefits.
The primary benefits cited by Ms. C from use of connected classroom technology
included increased knowledge of student learning through improved formative assessment
practices, students learning more about their own learning, and increased student engagement.
Although Ms. C was an experienced classroom teacher, classroom connectivity
technology provided her with information about her students that she previously had not known.
A key aspect of this experience was her realization that her ability to observe her students and
determine what they were learning was not as keen as she had supposed.
Kids…have learned to play a game. They can know nothing and appear that they know a
lot. I think it really brought to light for me that I did not have a good sense of what they
are learning by looking at them. (3050.TISp07.P90)
Immediate feedback regarding student learning provided Ms. C with important
information to guide classroom decision making. For example, Ms. C learned that her students
needed review and re-teaching after a lesson on distance/time graphs using motion detectors.
It also allows me to see right away, what things they know and what things they are not
catching on to.…Today, I could tell right away that they still cannot tell the difference
between a distance graph and a position graph and their meaning. (3050.poi07.P29)
15 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Ms. C also found the connected classroom technology beneficial for pinpointing errors
made by specific students. She used a Learning Check question to pre-assess her student’s
knowledge of rotation and revolution before teaching an earth systems lesson. The knowledge
she gained allowed her to differentiate her instruction to maximize instructional time for her
students.
We were doing earth and sun relationships … revolution versus rotation….But, we did a
learn check, and …I was able to … see who was making those mistakes still…. So it
helped me because I could pinpoint without embarrassing them. (3050.TIAu06.P47)
In another example, Ms. C reported using the connected classroom technology to help a
student analyze data in an inquiry learning activity. When class temperature/time data were
aggregated and displayed, one data set appeared as an outlier. Using the connected classroom
technology, Ms. C identified the student who had submitted the questionable data and helped her
diagnose her own error.
So I looked at the girl, and I said, “Do you know what you did? Look at this.”
And she said, “Oh, I put the temperature in before the time.”
And I said, “Yes, and what’s wrong with that?”
And she said, “The x information goes first. And I did it backwards.”
…But from that she learned what she was doing wrong. I would have never caught that
if we were just having a classroom discussion. (3050.TIAu06.P33)
In addition to learning more about her students, Ms. C reported that connected classroom
technology helped her students learn more about their own learning as well as the learning of
their classmates. When student responses were displayed anonymously in a public way, the class
viewed a variety of student ideas. Classroom discussion of wrong answers provided
opportunities for Ms. C and her students to explore student thinking about a particular topic. In
the focus group interview, students reported their perception that their teacher used the connected
classroom technology to encourage class participation and to help those students who needed
help.
16 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
You can make it kind of hip if you help her. You know, like who know[s] what they [are]
doing and who don’t [sic] know what they [are] doing. I think she does it because it helps
us and shows us how to do it. If she want[s] to see if we know it, and if we don’t, then
she will help us. (30502007-02-07.sfg.p6)
The Screen Capture feature of the Navigator™ system found utility for Ms. C as a way of
increasing on-task behavior in her class. She used the refresh feature frequently to monitor
student progress as they worked on calculator tasks. When Ms. C compared her connected
classroom to her previous teaching style she identified positive changes in the classroom
atmosphere and her interactions with her students. She felt her students worked in groups more
often and collaborated in their learning tasks.
We definitely now are connected now in a way that I have not experienced before. …And
the Navigator™ allowed that to occur…. Because the kids are always working in groups;
they are always helping each other. …It just has established a completely different
environment. (3050.TISp07.P80)
Summary
Overall Ms. C began the study fearful of the technology involved, but determined to
persist with her students. Her school structure provided excellent support in hardware, and she
enjoyed the support of her curriculum supervisor and many teaching colleagues who were
experienced with the technology. The principal at Ms. C’s school actively supported her
participation in this research study. Ms. C demonstrated a high tolerance for risk taking in her
classroom teaching and was not discouraged by temporary set-backs.
When her school selected the FOSS program, Ms. C received specialized training for the
curriculum and found the connected classroom technology highly compatible. Overall, Ms. C
decided the benefits in increased formative assessment opportunities, improved student
engagement in classroom tasks, targeted and timely data regarding individual student learning,
17 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
and support for inquiry learning provided by the Navigator™ compensated for the difficulties of
learning a new technology system.
Case Study 2: Ms D
Context
Ms. D held an undergraduate degree in animal science and had five years teaching
experience in middle school science. She reported participation in a variety of professional
development opportunities in her school community and was a teacher leader at her middle
school in Texas. Ms. D was confident of her technology skills as well as her science content
knowledge and was the only one of the three teachers in this study who reported prior
professional development with graphing calculators.
The school where Ms. D worked was located inside a major urban center in Texas and
housed a diverse student population with 92% of the students either Hispanic or Black and 82%
reported as economically disadvantaged. The students at Ms. D’s middle school attended core
subjects in single sex groups. Ms. D served as the teacher leader for the seventh grade boys
group. For many of the students in Ms. D’s science class, English was a second language.
Classroom instruction occurred only in English, but student-student communication during
observations was noted in both English and Spanish. Ms. D’s class sections included about 2224 students.
In the year prior to our study, Ms. D’s school was paired with Texas Instruments (TI) as a
community partner school. As a result of this initiative, professionals from TI participated in
science and mathematics outreach programs at the school. Ms. D received training in TI
graphing calculators as part of this collaboration and acquired a mentor - another high school
teacher located in Arkansas who led some of the teacher workshops that she attended. This
18 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
mentor informed Ms. D about the CCMS research project and was instrumental in encouraging
her to participate. The principal at Ms. D’s school was supportive of her innovative uses of
technology.
Instrumentality
Curriculum & resources
Ms. D taught Science 7, with units on life science, physical science, and environmental
science. The faculty at Ms. D’s school worked together on teams tracking student progress, but
each teacher designed and implemented his/her own classroom lessons. Ms. D had access to a
functioning class set of refurbished TI 73 graphing calculators and a variety of class sets of
compatible peripheral devices for making science related measurements including pH probes,
voltage readers, and motion detectors. Ms. D borrowed an interactive white board and computer
projector from the school media center.
Due to difficulty with her district office’s purchase of the Navigator equipment, Ms. D
did not receive her system until late November. A combination of refurbished graphing
calculators, link cord failures and an inadequately configured and old desktop computer resulted
in start-up difficulties using the system.
Social support.
Although Ms. D’s school enjoyed a school/business collaborative arrangement with TI,
no other teacher in her school used the Navigator™ system. Ms. D relied on the support of her
mentor in Arkansas through email communication and called the TI support center when she
needed help. Ms. D’s strong technology skills and resourcefulness were important elements in
her eventual success in installing and using the connected classroom technology. Her early
19 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
struggles with installation and use of the system were evident in her interviews and during her
classroom observations.
Congruence
Ms. D reported that connected classroom technology matched her teaching strategies in
many ways. For example, Ms. D started every class with an opening exercise that she called a
‘bell ringer’. After greeting students at the door, Ms. D expected them to gather their calculator
equipment and notebooks and be seated at four-desk tables. The bell-ringer questions were
distributed through a Navigator™ Learning Check document and reviewed with the Class
Analysis feature as the opening activity each day. Since Ms. D’s school was struggling to meet
state academic standards, she paid close attention to proscribed learning objectives and
individual student success on each. In addition to opening exercise and review, Ms. D used
connected classroom technology for students to review their individual homework assignments.
And [Learning Checks] are great because you can… put it by specific objectives and see
where you are weak…and who is specifically weak in what area. That just narrows it
down to each student by each objective…That is very good…because we have to know
exactly who is having problems with what… objectives. (3026.TIAu07.P54)
During classroom observations, Ms. D introduced her students to motion detectors in an
inquiry style lesson. Students first determined how their individual actions affected the
distance/time line generated on the graphing calculator plot and then attempted to match their
motion to reproduce given distance/time graphs. Each student worked with an individual
calculator and motion detector over two class periods. The screen capture component of the
connected classroom technology allowed students to view the graphs produced by each member
of the class and to recap the motion necessary to produce a particular trace. During the student
focus group interview, Ms. D’s students recalled additional inquiry activities using other
probeware devices.
20 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Ms. D’s school district had been focusing on student learning styles and accountability
for learning tasks. Her school and district mentors and colleagues were encouraged to have
students discuss how to solve problems and to take more responsibility for their individual
learning progress. Ms. D observed that the aims and goals of her district and school were
consistent with use of connected classroom technology.
Costs/Benefits
Costs.
The primary cost cited by Ms. D related to equipment management and adapting her
lessons to the new technology system. Ms. D felt rushed due to her perceived late acquisition of
the connected classroom technology.
I got a late start. And trying to use it every day is hard. And …equipment management is
hard. So once I felt more comfortable, [then] the more I used it of course…. It’s not hard
to adapt, but it takes a little time to adapt your lessons. (3026.TISp.P52)
Ms. D mentioned the need for additional planning required to use the connected classroom
equipment. Due to repeated early equipment failures attributed to her old refurbished calculators
and old computer, she routinely planned a back-up lesson in case things didn’t work out the way
she intended. Ms. D acknowledged the need to be flexible and persistent in working with the
technology.
Benefits.
The primary motivation Ms. D described to continue using the connected classroom
system despite initial difficulties was the increased knowledge she gained regarding her student’s
learning. Ms. D was surprised by what her students didn’t know and appreciative of timely and
useful feedback to guide her lesson planning.
21 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
I will give them a quiz which I think… they should know this.…And it comes back, and
…on one question half of them got it wrong. And I’m like, whoa! It really opens my
eyes and tells me that …they didn’t understand this. It really helps me quickly learn that
I need to go back … rather than move on. (3026.TISp.P67)
Ms. D also appreciated the greater sense of individualized communication that the system
afforded. She stated that in her connected classroom she could better identify individual student
problems and gain important information to guide her instructional choices.
It is just a great tool because you can narrow it down by topic and by student and you can
really work with that student on what they are having trouble with. (3026.TIAu07.P72)
The connected classroom provided Ms. D insights into how her students were learning
and caused her to reevaluate her role in the classroom. She related that the device changed the
student-teacher relationship in important ways, promoting discussion and encouraging students
to take more responsibility for their own learning.
With the Navigator™ you see their possibilities and their solutions and reasons why….
you have room for discussion. …It totally changes the dynamics…of the student-teacher
relationship. (3026.TIAu07.P82)
The students in Ms. D’s class responded positively to the connected classroom
technology. Ms. D reported that she valued the greater involvement of her students in classroom
question-and-answer teaching episodes. The anonymous nature of student responses seemed to
encourage students to respond even when they were unsure of their answers. During classroom
observations, her students were cooperative and participated enthusiastically in the lessons.
Every kid is involved… They like seeing that they are involved and it is confidential so
they do not feel weird about …saying who they are if they are not sure about it….The
kids just love it. (3026.TIAu07.P56)
22 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Summary
Overall Ms. D experienced support from her principal and school for use of connected
classroom technology. During the initial months of use, she struggled to cope with old
calculators, unreliable cords, and a less than optimal computer. Despite these initial trials, Ms. D
persisted and learned how to incorporate the technology in her classroom teaching. By the time
of her classroom observation, her students logged into the system seamlessly, completed
Learning Check assessments without any verbal guidance from Ms. D, and successfully used
Navigator™ to review distance/time graphs collected with motion detector probeware. In
addition to use of the connected classroom technology to support inquiry lessons, Ms. D
harnessed the technology for more traditional pedagogical uses. By targeting her assessments to
state learning objectives, Ms. D gained specific information regarding student learning gaps. Her
surprise at what her students did not know represented an important insight. Ms. D focused
primarily on the increased access to timely and targeted information about student learning as the
primary benefit of the connected classroom system. As her school struggled to meet state
mandates for student achievement, Ms. D identified increased frequency of formative assessment
as an important advantage.
Ms. S - Case Study
Context
Ms. S was in her third year of teaching, but was a new teacher at her current school. Her
teacher preparation included undergraduate training with a degree in secondary science
education. The high school where Ms. S taught physical science and chemistry was located in a
suburban fringe of a large city in Ohio. The school population was primarily White (92%) with
23 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
few students classified as economically disadvantaged (8%). Her class sizes were the largest of
the three teachers in this study with 26 and 30 students. Ms. S reported relatively high confidence
in both her science content knowledge and her knowledge and experience with educational
technology. She described previous use of probeware in chemistry teaching and was familiar
with the graphing calculator.
Instrumentality
Curriculum & resources.
Since this was the first year of physical science teaching (one semester of physics and
one semester of chemistry) for Ms. S, she was creating new lessons each day. Ms. S enjoyed
excellent access to educational resources at her secondary school including an interactive white
board and dedicated computer projector in her classroom. Although some of her students owned
their own calculators, Ms. S started the school year with a partial class set that left her slightly
short of sufficient equipment for each student to have an individual calculator. However, by
second semester, Ms. S had calculators for every student.
Social support.
Three mathematics teachers and one other science teacher at Ms. S’s high school had
Navigator™ systems in their classrooms and used them regularly. Two of the mathematics
teachers participated in the algebra 1 part of the CCMS field trial. Ms. S’s science teaching
colleague was a TI instructor and taught the summer institute that science teacher participants in
the study attended. This colleague recruited her to join the project and served as an important
mentor. Ms. S’s principal supported innovative technology uses and attended the Teachers
Teaching with Technology conference during the year prior to Ms. S’s participation. Her school
24 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
environment included not only significant technology resources, but also a culture of technology
innovation and experimentation.
Congruence
Although Ms. S had not participated in any graphing calculator professional development
courses prior to participating in our project, she felt comfortable with both the graphing
calculator and probe ware. In addition, Ms. S felt confident in her other technology skills. Ms. S
initially focused on her classroom set-up to accommodate the new technology and to establish
routines with her students.
Ms. S found connected classroom technology easier to integrate into content areas where
she felt well informed. She reported that when she had previously taught a topic and had
existing lesson plans, she was more likely to make the effort to integrate the technology. For
topics that were new to her teaching repertoire, her pre-lesson energies were spent refreshing her
knowledge.
Planned formative assessment represented an easy way for Ms. S to use the connected
classroom technology. She used Learning Check for both graded and un-graded quizzes. After
she mastered the Class Analysis feature of this component, she reported using the technology to
collect quiz scores.
Ms. S also used the Screen Capture feature of the connected classroom technology to
facilitate data gathering during a lesson on acids and bases. Students used pH paper with a
variety of indicators and gathered similar but not identical pH data on a selection of household
projects. Students could quickly see the data collected by others in the classroom using the
Screen Capture feature. Discussion about tool design, accuracy and precision, multiple
25 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
measurements, and averaging of class data demonstrated for students important aspects of
scientific inquiry.
Costs & Benefits
Costs.
For Ms. S the primary costs related to set-up of her classroom and establishing workable
classroom routines. With a supportive school environment and many collegial mentors, she
reported few difficulties with the system. Rather, she focused in her discussions and interviews
on placement of the various technology components within her new classroom, classroom
routines, students logging-on, and managing the intricacies of transitioning from the calculator
functions to Navigator™ functions and back. These initial costs seemed to be overcome by the
time of her spring telephone interview. Ms. S observed that her perception of the difficulty of
using the system decreased as she continued to gain experience and that her improving
knowledge of the system facilitated her continued use.
Benefits.
Ms. S found connected classroom technology helped her learn more about her student’s
learning. Early in her experiences she asked her students to take a practice state standardized test
and used the Navigator™ to rapidly analyze their data. With her colleagues, who also tested
their students, her department reviewed their ninth graders’ strengths and weaknesses. With
targeted information early in the school year, these teachers could implement teaching strategies
to narrow the gaps between their state science objectives and their students’ performance.
We …did pre-[state standardized tests]… so that we could get a breakdown of each
question for all four classes combined. So that was neat. And actually we had the other
teachers in the building do it also….and then we just combined all the teachers’ results
into one… class analysis. (3062.TI.Au06.P10)
26 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Ms. S identified rapid feedback as an important aspect of the technology. In addition to
the convenience of rapid scoring of in-class quizzes, Ms. S mentioned that students were able to
track their progress and ask questions before they had forgotten the lesson. Ms. S. also noted
high levels of student engagement during the slide show presentation of student results. Students
were able to notice others who made similar errors.
I used Learn[ing] Check for their quiz scores, I find that it is extremely helpful. When
I'm going over the answers that they can see -- oh, I'm not the only one who chose "C",
other students chose it also….They get a little more involved when they can see, "okay
two other people picked "C", I'm not the only idiot.. 3064.2007.02.22.poi P45
Ms. S used the connected classroom system to determine how successful students were
on short assessments related to daily lessons. She indicated that with more frequent assessments,
students asked more questions. She found the Screen Capture refresh feature helpful in checking
student progress as well as for data display during inquiry lessons. In her spring telephone
interview Ms. S stated that the Navigator™ helped students focus more on the science content.
She identified the public display of knowledge as an important benefit for both her students and
herself. Class discussion of open-ended responses helped her probe student understanding.
Summary
Overall Ms. S enjoyed a very supportive administrative and school culture for technology
innovation. Mentoring and troubleshooting were facilitated with accomplished TI Navigator™
users in nearby classrooms. While her class sizes were larger than either of the other teachers in
this study, Ms. S’s students were economically advantaged and already scoring well on state
standardized tests. Ms. S’s technology know-how helped her negotiate the initial start up issues
with the connected classroom system.
27 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Ms. S identified frequent, rapid and public assessment and review as important benefits
of the connected classroom technology. She observed that students were engaged in science
tasks and asked more questions when they received rapid feedback on short in-class assessments.
She recognized and took advantage of the connected classroom technology to survey all ninth
grade students to provide data for department review of student pre-achievement levels as a way
to maximize scores on state standardized achievement measures.
Physical Science Achievement
Comparisons of student achievement for the students of our case study teachers must be
made cautiously while remembering that Ms. D taught seventh graders most of whom spoke
English as a second language, Ms. C taught low achieving eighth graders and Ms. S taught
‘regular’ ninth graders. These three schools represented vastly different community wealth and
resources. Only Ms. S had a science curriculum that included one semester of chemistry and a
second semester of physics topics. Ms. D and Ms. C taught a wider range of science topics
including some life and environmental science. Table 4 reports the pre and post achievement for
each of these teachers and provides the post data from our pilot of the instrument for comparison.
The population that participated in the pilot consisted of students from both suburban and urban
schools and created a bimodal achievement profile, with suburban schools scoring above the
urban students. The value reported for the pilot in Table 4 represents the mean of both groups.
-----------------Table 4------------------Interestingly, Ms. C’s low achieving eighth graders and Ms. D’s low achieving seventh
graders show very similar achievement patterns with this instrument. Ms. S’s pre scores are
much higher, reflecting perhaps the affluence of the school community where she works as well
as their ninth grade school level. Post scores for Ms. S’s students are similar to the pilot data
28 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
results. While differences in the school curriculum, age level, and socio-economic status of the
schools are significant, students in all three classes showed gains in their mean achievement
levels. No conclusions can be drawn regarding the efficacy of connected classroom technology
and student achievement in science from this limited sample.
Conclusions and Discussion
The following section addresses each of the research questions addressed in this study.
What features characterize the school contexts where connected classroom technology has been
adopted by physical science teachers?
Despite the wide differences in school characteristics (socio-economic status, grade
levels, curriculum, diversity of student population, student gender), teacher technology skills
(novice to experienced), and teacher preparation programs, the three teachers profiled were all
successful at integration of connected classroom technology in their science teaching.
Characteristics of these schools that may have contributed to this success include collegial and
structural supports in their school culture. Administrators in each of these schools welcomed
innovative educational technology and provided the necessary encouragement as well as
peripheral devices. Ms. D - located at the most economically disadvantaged school and as a
pioneer Navigator™ user in her school community - experienced the most difficulty with the
technology, perhaps due to her refurbished calculators and older computer. In addition, her
mentor was not in her building forcing her to troubleshoot alone. Ms. S and Ms. C both joined
teams of connected classroom teachers in their school buildings who provided both social
support and technology expertise.
In what ways is the use of connected classroom technology congruent with physical science
teaching?
29 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
In this study, the connected classroom technology was sufficiently congruent with
teachers’ practice, skills, and values to support implementation in their classrooms despite the
broad differences between them. From the perspective of Archer’s social theory, teachers
initially adapted the new technology to their prior use patterns (1988). The flexibility of the
system allowed teachers to implement slowly, building confidence and testing its limits and
capabilities. As their proficiency developed, teachers valued the new information they were able
to access regarding student learning. Teachers used connected classroom technology to engage
in preplanned assessments for review, for test preparation, for initial assessment, and for
differentiation of instruction. In addition, teachers found the technology congruent with inquiry
teaching styles, especially with the use of probeware for data gathering. All three teachers used
the data collection, aggregation, and display features of the system to conduct inquiry lessons
with their students. While additional planning and preparation were mentioned, the three
teachers in this study found the system sufficiently flexible to adapt to their prior teaching
practices. The more frequent use of the connected classroom was for daily pre and post
assessments (planned formative assessment), homework checks, and improvised questions
related to lessons (interactive formative assessment) (Bell & Cowie, 2001).
What benefits do physical science teachers identify for use of connected classroom technology?
In particular, do physical science classroom teachers identify aspects of formative assessment
as benefits of connected classrooms?
Two of the three teachers explicitly reported that the connected classroom technology
provided them with information about their students that surprised them. The most veteran
teacher remarked that she was amazed that her ability to informally assess her students by
observing their classroom behavior to know whether they were learning did not provide her with
accurate information. Data gathering and evaluation represent important steps in the formative
30 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
assessment process (Bell & Cowie, 2001). Teacher selective notice of some students, but not all,
is a practice identified by Bell and Cowie (2001). This reading of students by viewing their
body language or by listening to the responses of a few vocal students may provide teachers with
unreliable data on which to base decisions about classroom instruction. The connected
classroom provides responses from more students (often every student logged in will respond),
giving the teacher a more accurate profile of student understanding.
All three teachers remarked that not only did they benefit from learning more about their
students, but their students also learned more about their own and other’s learning in the class.
Public display of anonymous answers promoted class discussion and revealed patterns in student
wrong answers. Students asked more questions and received feedback about their learning soon
after completing short assessments. Just-in-time information was viewed as powerful for both
students and teachers in these classrooms.
The case study teachers reported increased student engagement in connected classrooms.
They attributed this behavior to student acceptance of the new technology as well as the
opportunity for every student to respond to teacher probes. Students liked seeing their responses,
often demanded to see their names even when their responses were incorrect, and participated
actively in connected classroom activities. In student focus group interviews, students were
enthusiastic about the connected classroom and perceived their teachers used the system to help
them learn. In addition, the teachers appreciated the ability to use the Screen Capture component
to track individual student work and to monitor on- and off-task behavior. Earlier research
supports the observation that educational interventions that require high levels of student
response increase learning (e.g. Fischer & Berliner, 1985; Greenwood, Delquardi, & Hall, 1984).
31 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Teachers particularly reported learning about student ideas, using planned and interactive
formative assessment probes, and surprise at knowledge gaps revealed by students. The data
teachers gathered in connected classrooms seemed to be more comprehensive and targeted at
particular learning goals and individual students than the data teachers previously gathered based
on their informal impressions of how students were receiving a particular lesson. Practical
difficulties with gathering, aggregating and interpreting data in a timely manner under real
classroom conditions contributes to the difficulty teachers experience implementing formative
assessment practice (Assessment Reform Group, 1999; Black & Wiliam, 1998a, 1998b; Daws &
Singh, 1996). In this study, rapid response technology-facilitated formative assessment appeared
to reduce some of the barriers to the practice of formative assessment, informing teachers about
their students as well as informing students about their own and other’s learning.
Furtak describes a continuum of formative assessment practice, from informal on-the-fly
assessment to curriculum embedded formative assessment strategies (2006). The teachers in this
study reported using formative assessment practices from all along this continuum, from use of
standardized achievement tests to gather data targeted to specific learning objectives and specific
students, to improvised questions related to a particular learning task.
Implications and Future Work
Connected classroom technology represents a rich and unique resource for science
classrooms in a variety of contexts. As a cultural change, the teachers in this study found
technology compatible with their school structures, congruent with their teaching practice
especially with regard to assessment, and worth the effort to implement. While three case
studies represent only a small sample, the remarkable similarities in collegial and school culture
supportive of innovative technology use are noteworthy. Easy adaptation of the technology to
32 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
both inquiry lessons and more traditional assessment tasks facilitated teacher use. The teachers
persisted due to their perception of the benefits of increased understanding of their students,
timely and targeted information regarding student learning, and increased student engagement
and involvement in classroom tasks. Technology-facilitated formative assessment helped
teachers gather more accurate data about student learning from a large number of their students.
Students also gained knowledge about their own learning as well as the learning of their
classmates. While connected classroom technology does not help teachers decide how to instruct
their students, in this study teachers reported being better informed about student learning.
Future studies should focus on detailed analysis of teacher formative assessment practice to
explore teacher classroom decision making.
Acknowledgements: The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education, through Grant R305K050045 to The Ohio State University. The opinions expressed are
those of the authors and do not represent views of the U.S. Department of Education.
References
Assessment Reform Group (1999). Assessment for learning: Beyond the black box. Cambridge:
University of Cambridge, School of Education.
Archer, M. (1988). Culture and agency: The place of culture in social theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bapst, J. J. (1971). The effect of systematic student response upon teaching behavior,
Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Seattle: University of Washington.
Bell, B. & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment and science education. In K. Tobin (Ed.)
Science & technology education library (Vol. 12). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Bessler, W. C. (1969). The effectiveness of an electronic response system in teaching biology to
the non-major utilizing nine group-paced linear programs. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Ball State University, Muncie, IN.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education,
5(1), 7-74.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom
assessment. London: King's College London.
33 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Brown, J. D. (1972). An evaluation of the Spitz student response system in teaching a course in
logical and mathematical concepts. Journal of Experimental Education, 40(3), 12-20.
Burnstein, R. A., & Lederman, L. M. (2001). Using wireless keypads in lecture classes. The
Physics Teacher, 39, 8-11.
Casanova, J. (1971). An instructional experiment in organic chemistry, the use of a student
response system. Journal of Chemical Education, 48(7), 453-455.
Cheung, D. (2006). TCSS: A new computer system for developing formative assessments.
School Science Review, 88(322), 61-70.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2000). State Educational Assessment Center, State
student assessment programs database, 1997-1998 school year. Available:
http://nces.ed.gov
Cowie, B. & Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment
in Education, 6(1), 101-116.
Cuban, L. (1998). How schools change reforms: Redefining reform successes and failure.
Teachers College Record, 99(3), 453-477.
Daws, N. & Singh, B. (1996). Formative assessment: To what extent is its potential to enhance
pupils’ science being realized? School Science Review, 77(281), 93-100.
Daws N, & Singh, B. (1999). Formative assessment strategies in secondary science. School
Science Review 80, 71–78.
Doyle, W. & Ponder, G.A. (1977) The practicality ethic in teacher decision-making,
Interchange, 8(1), 1-12.
Dufresne, R. J., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., Mestre, J. P., & Wenk, L. (1996). Using the
Classtalk classroom communication system for promoting active learning in large
lectures. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 7, 3-47.
Fies, C. & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. Journal
of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101-109.
Fischer, C. W. & Berliner, D. C. (Eds) Perspectives on instructional time. New York: Longman.
Furtak, E. M. (2006). Formative assessment in K-8 science education: A conceptual review.
Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Hake, R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand student
survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of
Physics, 66(1), 64-74.
Greenwood, C. R., Delquardi, J. & Hall, R. V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and academic
achievement. In W. L. Heward, T. E. Heron, D. S. Hill, & J. Trap-Porter (Eds.), Focus on
behavioral analysis in education. (pp. 58-88). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Judson, E., & Sawada, D. (2002). Learning from past and present: Electronic response systems in
college lecture halls. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(2),
167-181.
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
34 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis,
2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Pape, S. J., Owens, D. T., Irving, K. E., Boscardin, C., Sanalan, V. A., Abrahamson, L., Kaya,
,S., Ucar, S. & Shin, H. S. (2008). Classroom Connectivity in Promoting Mathematics
and Science Achievement: Year 1 Results. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association: NY, NY.
Pape, S. J., Irving, K. E., Owens, D. T., Abrahamson, L. & Demana, F. (2008). Professional
development for technology enhanced classrooms: Lessons learned over two years.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Mathematics Teacher
Educators: Tulsa, OK.
Priestley, M. (2005). Making the most of the Curriculum Review: Some reflections on
supporting and sustaining change in schools. Scottish Educational Review, 37(1), 29-38.
Priestley, M. & Sime, D. (2005). Formative assessment for all: A whole-school approach to
pedagogic change. The Curriculum Journal, 16(4), 475-492.
Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R., & Abrahamson, L. (2004). The networked classroom. Educational
Leadership, 61(5), 50-54.
Ruiz-Primo, M. A. & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring teachers’ informal formative assessment
practices and students’ understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 44(1). 57-84. .
Sanalan, V. A., Irving, K. E., Pape, S. J., & Owens, D. T. (2008). A multi-faceted professional
development program for science teachers: Classroom connectivity technology. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Science Teacher Education: St.
Louis, MO.
Slain, D., Abate, M., Hodges, B. M., Stamatakis, M. K., & Wolak, S. (2004). An interactive
responses system to promote active learning in the doctor of pharmacy curriculum.
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 68(5), 1-9.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Applied social science research methods series (3rd
ed., Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
35 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Figure 1. Connected classroom schematic.
36 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Table 1. School demographic information*
# Students
Grade levels
Location
Ms. D
Texas
856
Grades 7-8
57% Hispanic
35% Black
5% White
3% Asian/Pacific Islander
<1% Native American
82%
Ms. C
Ohio
662
Grades 6-8
51% White
36% Black
11% Multiracial
2% Unspecified
72%
Ms. S
Ohio
897
Grades 9-12
98% White
8%
*www.Greatschools.net
School Diversity
Economically
disadvantaged
Name**
** Pseudonyms
Table 2. Teacher preparation.
Name*
Ms. D
Ms. C
Ms. S
Undergraduate major
Animal Science
Elementary Education
Secondary Education
Year graduated
2000
1987
2003
Graduate degree
None
1995, Curriculum & Instruction
None
Years teaching
5
18
3
*Pseudonyms
Table 3. Participant self-report of technology skills, professional development activity, expertise in teaching
physics and chemistry.
Technology
Professional
Expertise in
Expertise in
Teacher
Experience & Skills Development
teaching Physics
teaching Chemistry
(Qs 1-51, %)
(Qs 52-62, %)
(Qs 63-72, %)
(Qs 73-82, %)
Ms. D
78
49
72
84
Ms. C
51
40
49
38
Ms. S
75
40
90
93
37 of 38
Physical science connected classrooms…
Table 4. Student physical science achievement
Test
N
Mean (SD)*
Pilot
(9th grade)
Post
269
25.4 (8.1)
Ms. C
(8th grade)
Pre
54
17.2 (4.4)
Post
48
20.1 (5.5)
Pre
23
17.3 (4.4)
Post
24
19.4 (4.7)
Pre
44
22.9 (5.9)
Post
48
25.7 (6.3)
Ms. D
(7th grade)
Ms. S
(9th grade)
* 42 maximum score
38 of 38