Running head: TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
Effectively Implementing Technology in the Mathematics Classroom
Jamie Walker
Purdue University
Abstract
This paper addresses the importance of implementing the effective use of technology in the
mathematics classroom. First, the paper focuses on the benefits of incorporating technology in
the classroom. The benefits include the focus of instruction of high order thinking skills and
preparation for the technology laden workplace. Then it looks at the factors preventing
mathematics teachers from implementing technology in the classroom. These preventive factors
include time, training, and support of administration. Finally, it outlines the actions that must be
taken at the college and professional levels to support teachers in effectively implementing
technology in the classroom. These actions include developing technology-based methods
courses at the collegiate level and giving teachers time in the workday to collaborate with peers.
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
Effectively Incorporating Technology in the Mathematics Classroom
In the 21st century world of handheld computers, phones, and the internet it is of utmost
importance that students are exposed to these technologies in school, particularly in their
mathematics classes, in order to be prepared for their future careers. Despite the growth of
availability of computers in schools, the use of computers in the classroom has not grown in
proportion. In order to solve this problem we have to examine how to provide both pre-service
and in-service teachers with the proper support, and how to use technology effectively in the
mathematics classroom.
Schools are now pushing for problem based learning in the mathematics classroom and
using technology can enhance this learning approach. Students need to use technology in the
math classroom to get experience with the tools they will use as professionals. These tools
include the internet, spreadsheets, word-processing programs, audiovisual programs, and slideshow tools. According to Sage (2000):
Technology often plays an important role during the problem-based learning
(PBL) process, serving as a critical tool for information searching, organising and
analysing data, and presenting solutions. While technology is not a required
component of PBL, both the inquiry process and the resulting solutions can be
enhanced by its use, adding elements of authenticity and relevance to students’
2
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
work... Students can collect relevant data or recent information using the Internet,
and then analyse and manage the data and other supportive evidence using the
same tools that professionals use: spreadsheets, digital pictures and video clips.
Finally, students can develop and share their solutions with key stakeholders
using presentation or video software.
Technology has a further role in the mathematics classroom beyond presentation
software. This is especially true in the algebra classroom where there has been a shift from
symbol manipulation to critical thinking and high order thinking skills. According to Lamb (no
date):
With the use of technology, students do not need to spend endless
amounts of time manipulating mathematics, but can spend more
time on analyzing it. Mundane skills to solve problems may be left
to be manipulated with the use of technology because there is a
push for students to increase their higher ordered thinking
skills. Synthesizing, analyzing, communicating, conjecturing,
justifying, and developing independent methods to solve problems
are skills that are valued for a successful transition into the 21st
century and its technology rich workplace.
Another reason to incorporate technology into the mathematics classroom is to level the
playing field across race, gender, and socioeconomic status because “with a strong math
3
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
background, students have better choices about higher education, which is a gateway to more
careers” (Herzig, 2005, p.254 as cited in Lamb, 2007).”
Despite all the reasons that technology should be incorporated into the classroom and the
great availability of technology, its use in the classroom has not grown in proportion. The
National Center for Education Statistics (2013) found:
Many schools have computer laboratories, and school
administrators reported that-across the grades-more than half of
students were in schools where computers were available for
classroom use when needed. Fifty-six percent of students in grade
4, 61 percent of students in grade 8, and 79 percent in grade 12
were in schools with computer laboratories.
If computers are to have an impact on mathematics instruction and
achievement, students must have opportunities to use the
equipment. NAEP, therefore, asked teachers and administrators
about student use. Despite the availability of computers, teacher
reports indicated that access to them was more limited.
Teachers and administrators reported that computer access was
difficult for about half of the students at grades 4 and 8. Teachers
and students agreed that school use of computers was greater at
grade 4 than at grade 8, but usage in general was quite limited.
4
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
So despite all of this availability of technology, why has the use of technology in the
classroom not caught up? Spend the year as a mathematics teacher and the answer is quite
apparent. The lack of time in the school year, the lack of training to effectively use technology,
and the breadth of knowledge that has to be imparted to students makes it very hard to
implement.
Several studies have found this to be so. Ertmer et al found that there “was lack of
preparation time, limited resources, lack of administrative support and limited class time to
implement PBL” in the mathematics classroom or any classroom (as cited in Ertmner and Park,
2008, p. 632). According to Brush and Saye (2000) and Land (2000) there are some additional
problems such as teachers difficulty shifting roles from the source of knowledge to the guide and
letting students self-direct (as cited in Ertmer and Park, 2008, p. 632). In addition, Ertmer and
Park said:
Our study also indicated that the lack of feedback and expectations
was a major barrier to the design and implementation of PBL units.
Schaffer and Richardson (2004) also found that insufficient
feedback, relative to expectations, was one of major barriers to
technology integration in the K-12 classroom. That is, teachers
need regular corrective feedback, especially when they implement
new teaching methods (Scheeler, Ruhl & McAfee, 2004; Spencer
& Logan, 2003).
5
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
Another problem is that administrators simply did not communicate their vision for
technology and their expectations for teachers. Park and Ertmer state, “We recommend sharing
the vision of technology-enhanced PBL with teachers (ie, school strategic plans)” (Ertmer and
Park, 2008). It seems strange that properly stating the school’s mission would make such a
difference but doing so is what gives importance to the topic. If teachers do not see the utilization
of technology as important, they are not going to give their best effort.
Given all these barriers, what can colleges do to prepare pre-service teachers for these
technology standards? Second, what can school administration do to support in-service teachers
as they try to implement these technology standards? The first thing that can be done is to create
methods courses that specifically teach pre-professionals how to use available classroom
technology. These courses must be mandatory in nature and students must be required to take
one or more of these classes. The University of Northern Colorado created one such methods
course called Tools and Technology for Secondary Mathematics. This methods course had three
goals:
First, teacher candidates receive hands-on training in using
software tools, graphing calculators, and the Internet for
mathematics instruction focused at the secondary school
level. Second, they learn how and when to use appropriate
technology to enhance their mathematics instruction of topics that
are taught at the middle and high school grades. Third, they
develop and teach lessons to their peers with equipment available
to a typical public school mathematics classroom, using the
technology learned in this course. (Powers and Blubaugh, 2005)
6
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
A course such as this has several benefits. First, the hands-on practice they get using
classroom technologies eliminates any future independent learning that they would have to find
time for in order to incorporate the technology while on the job. This is the time that most
teachers argue that they do not have in order to learn to utilize the benefits of new technology.
Second, they learn how to use this technology to enhance their lesson plans and discuss how not
to use technology in order to make sure their lesson incorporates technology effectively. Finally,
these pre-service teachers get to practice teaching the lesson. This helps them become familiar
and comfortable with a technology enhanced lesson plan and also serves to address any of the
myriad difficulties that may arise in the classroom.
There are also things that can be done with in-service teachers who may not have had the
luck of practicing technology in college. School administrations can do several things for these
teachers. First, in-service teachers must be given professional development days devoted solely
to familiarizing themselves to the software that the school system has available and learning how
it can be effectively applied in the classroom. Teachers also must be given time during the school
day to collaborate with peers and share best practices. It is important that teachers are allotted
time specifically for this type of intervention because teachers simply do not have time to do this
on their own given all their other responsibilities. Park and Ertmer (2008) support this in their
study. They stated:
“..The results of this study suggested that the biggest differences
between the performances of typical and expert PBL teachers
included collaborating with peers…. Furthermore, establishing
partnerships with other PBL teachers may provide opportunities
7
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
for reflecting on their practice and initiating changes based on
peers’ suggestions…. Teachers should be encouraged to develop
joint units with other teachers and thus receive ongoing feedback
from each other. Collaboration with peers may be an effective way
to deal with many of the barriers teachers encounter when
implementing PBL” (Park and Ertmer, 2008, p. 640).
Another thing Park and Ertmer recommended was administrative feedback and a clear
statement of the school vision for technology so that teachers know what is expected of them.
They state, “The results of this study illustrated the importance of establishing a shared vision,
detailing expectations and providing feedback to support teachers as they implement new
teaching methods, such as technology-enhanced PBL” (Park and Ertmer, 2008, p. 641). They go
further to say, “Pedersen and Marek (2007) stressed that teachers are being pressured to integrate
technology or use an innovation to meet an expectation rather than having a concrete purpose for
its use” (Pedersen and Marek, as cited in Ertmer and Park, 2008, p. 642).
There are many obstacles that mathematics teachers face in implementing technology in
their classroom. Numerous professional organizations admit the importance of technology,
especially in the mathematics classroom. Technology must be present in the classroom if we are
to prepare our students for the rigor of life in the professional world. The biggest problems in
incorporating technology are time and training and, to some extent, a school vision. We must
take action at the college level and in the professional world to support teachers in our endeavor
to incorporate technology, if we do not our teachers will not be able to do it on their own and our
8
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
students will be ill prepared for the workforce and our country will fall behind on the
international stage as innovators and contributors to economic prosperity.
9
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
References
Brush, T. & Saye, J. (2000). Design, implementation, and evaluation of student-centered
learning: a case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 2, 79–100.
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Ertmer, P. A., 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, 54–71.
Ertmer, P. A., Lehman, J., Park, S. H., Cramer, J. & Grove, K. (2003). Barriers to teachers’
adoption and use of technology in the problem-based learning. In Proceedings of Association for
the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) Society for Information Technology and
Teacher Education (SITE) International Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, June 23–28, 2003 (pp.
1761–1766). Washington DC: AACE.
Herzig, A.H. (2005, November). Goals for achieving diversity in mathematics classrooms.
Mathematics Teacher, 99(4), 253-259.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning:what and howdo students learn?
Educational
Psychology Review, 16, 235–266.
Lamb, Hai. (2007). Technology in the Secondary Mathematics Classroom. Retrieved from
http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1325310-Technology-in-the-MathematicsClassroom
10
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Calculators and Computers. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs92/web/92060.asp
Picciano, A.G. (2006). Educational leadership and planning for technology (4th ed). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Park, S. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2008). Examining barriers in technology-enhanced problem-based
learning: Using a performance support systems approach. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 39(4), 631-643
Pedersen, J. E. & Marek, E. A. (2007). Technology integration: PDAs as an instructional and
reflective tool in the science classroom. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher
Education,
7, 1, 521–528.
Powers, R., & Blubaugh, W. (2005). Technology in mathematics education: Preparing teachers
for the future. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial],
5(3/4). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol5/iss3/mathematics/article1.cfm
Sage, S.M. (2000). A natural fit: problem-based learning and technology standards. Learning
and Leading with Technology, 28, 1, 6–12.
Schaffer, S. P. & Richardson, J. C. (2004). Supporting technology integration within a teacher
education system. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31, 423–435.
Scheeler, M. C., Ruhl, K. L. & McAfee, J. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to
teachers:
11
TECHNOLOGY IN THE MATHEMATICS CLASSROOM
a review [Electronic version]. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27, 4, 396–407.
Stepien, W. J., Gallagher, S. A. & Workman, D. (1993). PBL for traditional and interdisciplinary
classrooms. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 338–357.
12