The literature review reinforced my ideas about technology in the classroom. It is being heavily used and studied as a method to increase test scores. It is well know that scores have not been increasing. I think I found enough research to indicate that others are beginning to consider if technology in the classroom helps and not blindly asking “What type of technology works best to increase scores?”
I don’t think standardized test scores do a very good job of measuring student understanding, but improving those scores is the objective of much of the technology integration we’ve seen it the past few years. It would be, in my opinion, fool hardy to not consider these scores as a type of artifact. These scores are the measure of success for everyone outside the classroom and it has to be used by those inside also.
Student interviews are invaluable for understanding students’ interaction with the technology. I believe that a survey form might be the best way to gather truthful information. Focus groups are also a good way to gather the group perspective. A group dynamic may offer opportunities to share that might not occur while individually filling out a survey. The final leg of triangulation, observation, is less of a quantitative measure and more qualitative. I think observing the students interaction with the technology could be a value measure of effectiveness. The “on task”/”off task” approach might be appropriate.
To bring about solid triangulation, I would need to develop data sets that were group by lesson and/or unit. Setting it up in those increments would allow for better tracking. It would also be easier to draw correlations on micro and macro levels.
