THESIS APPROVAL PAGE Education Specialist Thesis Specialization in Technology and Curriculum Design

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP MIDDLE TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY

Web 2.0: Understanding Teacher's Perceptions and Barriers that Prevent Utilization in the Classroom.

Presented by Crystalynn Cunningham, M.Ed.

Approved:

Thesis Committee Chair

Thesis Committee Member / Reader

Department Chair

Dean of the College of Graduate Studies

WEB 2.0: UNDERSTANDING TEACHERS PERCEPTIONS AND BARRIERS THAT PREVENT UTILIZATION IN THE CLASSROOM

by Crystalynn Cunningham May 2011

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School at Middle Tennessee State University in Partial Fulfillment for the Specialist in Education in Curriculum and Instruction in Educational Leadership

ii

Dedication

To my husband, without your love and support I would not have been able to accomplish all that I have.

In memory of my father Jerry Fulton Kitchens Sr. I hope I make you proud.

iii

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Dorothy Valcarcel Craig for her guidance and encouragement during this process, not to mention patience and understanding of things beyond my control. I would also like thank my thesis committee for being a part of this experience and volunteering your time to review my research. I would like to acknowledge Dr. Judy Whalley whose insight about academic writing was highly valuable during the undertaking of this study. I want to send a special thanks to Jo Ann Bryant for taking time to discuss my research and sharing valuable information that helped guide my research, our talks about education, technology and practical applications helped formed the foundations of this research. I also want to say thanks to Edward Demesa for taking the time to review and edit my research. Last, but not least, I want to thank all my family, especially my children for understanding that I needed this time to focus and apply myself in order to finish my degree. My time away from you is not forgotten and was highly missed, but the results of this accomplishment is my way of showing you that you can accomplish anything you set your mind to as long as you have love and support. I love you all so much!

iv

Abstract The Internet has changed the way people communicate, research, work, and learn. As the world has moved into the 21st century the skill sets that are needed in todays job market have changed drastically in the last 15 years with the introduction of the Internet. Businesses are looking to educators to provide future employees with the skills that are currently in demand. As fast paced as technology is in the business world, education moves much slower. While employers are expecting schools to produce employees capable of interacting in a Web 2.0 world, education is stuck in a Web 1.0 world. This is a case study research that examines the use of Web 2.0 and its practical applications in an urban high school and further explores the reasons that these tools are not employed in an educational setting.

Table of Contents Chapter I: Introduction Definitions Assumptions Limitations and Delimitations Summary Chapter II: Review of Literature Web 2.0 Pedagogy and Constructivist Theory Web 2.0 in the Classroom Implications and Benefits of Web 2.0 in the Classroom Institutional and Instructional Barriers Summary Chapter III: Research Methodology Case Study Research Location and Subjects Design Approach and Instruments Data and Data Collection Procedures and Timeline Data Analysis Summary Chapter IV: Data Analysis
vi

1 4 6 6 7 8 9 11 12 15 16 18 19 19 21 22 31 33 35 36 37

Introduction to Analysis Analysis of Data Data Analysis Timeline Summary Chapter V: Findings and Conclusion Introduction Findings Discussion Recommendations Suggestions for Future Research Summary References Appendix A: Web 2.0 Survey Appendix B: Interview Protocol Appendix C: Observation Protocol Appendix D: Electronic Interview Appendix E: Index Cards Coded Appendix F: Internet Permission Form 2010/2011 IRB Approval

37 37 41 43 44 44 44 57 57 58 59 60 68 72 73 74 79 80 82

vii

List of Tables Table 1: Triangulation Matrix Table 2: Timeline of Data Collection Table 3: Categories, Patterns, Relationships Table 4: Data Analysis Timeline 32 34 40 42

viii

List of Figures

Figure 1: Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 Chart Figure 2: Web 2.0 Survey Figure 3: Interview Protocol Figure 4: Electronic Interview Protocol Figure 5: Observation Protocol Figure 6: Overarching Question #1 Triangulation Matrix Figure 7: Web 2.0 Survey Results Figure 8: Overarching Question #2 Triangulation Matrix Figure 9: Overarching Question #3 Triangulation Matrix Figure 10: Overarching Question #4 Triangulation Matrix Figure 11: System Properties of Student Computer (Optiplex) Figure 12: Current Base Model Dell Optiplex

9 23 27 29 30 45 46 48 50 53 55 56

ix

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION Computing technology has permeated our culture since the early 1980s heightened by the increased ownership of the personal computers. Consequently, people have come up with innovative ways to use the available technology to enhance their lives and broaden their horizons. For example, the Internet brought the world to our fingertips through instant message, Internet relay chat, and information about almost anything through websites. According to Internetworldstats.com, since December 31, 2000 to June 30, 2010, the number of people who use the Internet has gone up 444% (2010). During that time communication took on new forms. For example, people were able to chat with each other from all across the world, videoconferencing took away the expense of traveling to board room meetings across the globe, and information could be accessed easily through the use of search engines and online databases. Microsoft founder Bill Gates wrote in his book Business at the Speed of Thought that, The Internet creates a new universal space for information sharing, collaboration, and commerce (Gates, 1999, p. xvi). It was this foresight of Gates and others that had taken the Internet as a basic research tool into an open community forum where knowledge is free and commonplace. In the past decade, the number of computing devices has exploded, Internet communication has evolved, and digital devices have gotten smaller. It is through this evolution that corporations have embraced technology as the backbone of their businesses. Since the implementation of the Internet, many businesses have harnessed the power of the World Wide Web to gain new clients, market their products, expand their companies globally, research information on new products, and define how people

conduct business. Companies that have embraced the power of the Internet gain new customers twenty four hours a day, seven days a week (Chadwick, 1997). As technology has evolved so have successful businesses. From large to small, companies look to technology to keep their businesses moving forward. According to Don Tapscott (2009), A growing number of firms are decentralizing decision-making functions, communicating in a peer-to-peer fashion, and embracing new technologies which empower employees to communicate easily and openly with people inside and outside the firm (para. 2). The latest trend in social media has been harnessed by companies such as Best Buy, who have made it their business to find out what employees think, by using an internal social network to collaborate with their employees on how to solve internal business problems and to promote a community where employees feel their input is valuable (Thibodeau, 2009). It is this use of current technology, collaboration, and teamwork that is valuable to businesses. It is also these very skills that businesses are looking at educators to produce in the next generation of employees. Business has always had a vested interest in education. Amy Wilkins of The Education Trust in an interview with PBS Frontlines producer John Merrow (2002) noted that business are going to need employees with higher technology skills than ever before and business are looking to schools and educators to provided those skills for future employees (Some People Have Expressed, para 1 ). Employees today need a different set of job skills than in previous generations. In recent years, this new set of job skills has been coined 21st Century Skills by various business and education organizations. These skills consist of a high level academic achievement, thinking and reasoning skills, collaboration with co-workers and proficient use of technology (U.S.

Department of Labor, 2000). Many business associations also feel that it is the right of the business community to voice their concerns over the level of readiness of students that graduate to have the skills needed to compete in the technology driven workforce (Massachusetts Business Alliance, 2008). Technology has changed the landscape of how businesses compete in a global market economy. Technology and its applications also must change the way educators teach in order to prepare students for the jobs that await them. Business leaders and academics both argue that students will need to be knowledgeable in problem solving skills, have creativity, and collaborate with others in a multi-cultured global marketplace in this high tech digital age as much as they need to know core academic subjects (Gewertz, 2008). Through the integration of education and technology, students will be prepared for the world. Companies such as Apple Inc. feel that this merger is imperative to the digital natives to harness the skills they already possess. This statement from Apple in 2007 speaks clearly about the future of technology and education: Integrating technology into teaching and learning is a critical component of preparing students for success in the 21st century, regardless of the subject matter being taught. When schools fit learning into the mobile and media rich learning styles and lifestyles of 21st century learnersand when students are able to use the digital learning skills they already havestudents are more engaged. And when students are more engaged, they acquire new skills and improve academic performance.

It is through this merger of technology and education that students will graduate from high schools and colleges with the skills that business leaders need to keep industry in the United States competitive with the new global economy.

With the advancement and popularity of Web 2.0 websites such as Facebook and MySpace, communication and collaboration between people is becoming more open and available. This new phenomenon is centered on the fact that people are willing to share information with each other and receive real time answers to questions. This sounds like a tool that educators would love to harness in their classrooms. However, Web 2.0 tools such as Facebook are generally blocked from educational institutions and teachers are not able to implement many of these tools in their classrooms. Based on the need to determine if Web 2.0 tools are being utilized in school the purpose of this research was to examine Web 2.0 use in the classroom from teachers perspective and assesses the barriers that may be preventing teachers from using Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. This qualitative study used the following set of overarching questions to frame the inquiry: 1. Which Web 2.0 tools are being utilized in the classroom? 2. If Web 2.0 tools are not being utilized what are reasons preventing use? 3. Do teachers who have training in Web 2.0 tools utilize them more than those who have not been trained, and if so why? 4. What are some of the barriers that are preventing teachers who do not utilize Web 2.0 tools from using the tools as an educational medium?

Definitions In order to gain full understanding of the data presented in this study, the following terms are further defined to provide clarity.

21st century skills: A set of skills that include: strong academic, thinking, reasoning, teamwork skills, and proficiency in using technology (U.S. Department of Labor, 2000)

Blog: Web site that contains an online personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided by the writer (meriam-webster.com).

Digital Natives: A person who has grown up in a world with digital technology such as the Internet and mobile phones (macmillandictionary.com).

Net Generation: Persons who have grown up digital; who are comfortable with technology and see technology as part of the natural part of the landscape; generally persons born from 1977 to present where digital technology has always existed (Tapscott, 2009).

Podcasts: A program (as of music or talk) made available in digital format for automatic download over the Internet (merriam-webster.com).

RSS Feed: RSS abbreviated for Rich Site Summary or Really Simple Syndicate, a way of allowing web users to receive syndicated newsletters and email alerts (dictionary.com).

Social Network: A website where one connects with those sharing personal or professional interests, place of origin, education at a particular school, etc. (dictionary.com). Web 1.0: Generally referred to the Internet and websites before the Web 2.0 phenomenon; Internet and websites provided information retrieval and limited user interaction (PC Magazine Encyclopedia).

Web 2.0: The Internet viewed as a medium in which interactive experience, in the form of blogs, wikis, forums, etc, plays a more important role than simply accessing information (dictionary.com).

Wiki: A Web site that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or corrections (Meriam-Webster online).

Assumptions Businesses are using technology to increase productivity. Use of technology skills and collaboration are key components of the 21st century skills that businesses are demanding from schools and educators to provide. This research study will examine Web 2.0 use and barriers that prevent teachers from using Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. The design of the study and research instruments is guided by the assumption that Web 2.0 is widely used by businesses as well as some educational settings. The researcher also assumes that resources for Web 2.0 are available for teachers within this school and although the resources are available some may not be using the tools.

Limitations and Delimitations One limitation that exists in this research is the study itself. This study is designed as a case study that will be examining one school in a district that has over 74,000 students who are currently enrolled in the district's 71 elementary schools, 36 middle schools and 15 high schools. This case study is focused on one of the specialty schools that serve students who have severe emotional and behavioral disorders and almost every teacher within the school is classified as a special education teacher. This fact alone

limits the study to only this type of school and will not be representative of the total population of teachers and schools within the district. Limited knowledge of the subject may prevent interviewees from fully addressing the issue. While many of the teachers may have proficient basic computer use, they may not expand on the topic if they are not aware of the uses and benefits of Web 2.0. This may limit the responses to questions that will address the topic in this study and not provide a clear enough picture to fully address the research questions.

Summary Since the beginning of the 21st century, there has been a focus on technology in business and in education. There is a direct correlation between what skills that business leaders want and how educators will provide those skills to students. Technology will help bridge the gap. The focus of this study is to examine one case and determine what barriers exist that keeps Web 2.0 tools from being implemented in the classroom. The following chapters will review the literature, examine research methods being used, analyze the data, and report any findings that will be found during the course of the study.

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE Web 2.0 is a phrase that was first introduced to the public in 2001 by Dale Dougherty of OReilly Media during a brainstorming session about what to do about the dot-com bubble that had burst in the late nineties (OReilly, 2005). Although at the time Web 2.0 didnt really have a substantial definition, it was just a phrase to term the changes that had emerged and survived on the Internet. However, it would be the spark of new and exciting applications via the World Wide Web. Now, Web 2.0 refers to the use of the internet to collaborate, share, and contribute interactive websites such as blogs, wikis, and social network sites (Anderson, 2007). Under this premise the application of Web 2.0 tools lends itself to educational applications where students are no longer sponges absorbing knowledge. Instead, students are stewards of their own learning (Switzer, 2004). They are able to gather knowledge not only from information sites, but they can also gather information from peers and experts across the globe. Using the knowledge the students obtain, they are able to use these new tools to create their own understanding of a subject and broadcast it to their teachers, peers, parents, and everyone willing to take the time to look. The use of blogs, wikis, and various other social network and collaboration sites have made the Internet a new and exciting experience since its inception. This interaction among users has brought the world to the classroom (Sendall, Ceccucci, & Peslak, 2008).

Web 2.0 While the Internet still provides content in the form of webpages, the dynamic of the content has changed. Users now interact with webpages. For example, users can include their own thoughts about content, change content, and create content for sharing and review with other online participants (Thompson, 2008). Web 1.0 is now used to reference the previous generation of Internet use. In order to fully understand the difference of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0, Dale Dougherty of OReilly Media and MediaLive International (2007) began looking at key differences in the use of the Internet (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 Figure 1. Chart created by Dale Dougherty of OReilly Media and MediaLive distinguishing Web 1.0 from Web 2.0. Adapted from What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software by Tim OReilly, 2007, Communications and Strategies,65. p.17. Copyright 2007 by Communications and Strategies.

10

Thompson (2008) noted the difference of Web 1.0 as a read-only medium whereas; Web 2.0 is a read/write medium. For example, the Britannica Online is a website where information from the Britannica Encyclopedia is available for users to access. On the other hand Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia where users can create content entries, add information to existing content, or edit content that others have added (OReilly, 2007). The online participation of users transform Wikipedia from an online encyclopedia to a community based site for information. Many other Web 2.0 websites utilize the same philosophy of the online community. YouTube, for instance, allows users to upload their videos to the website where members can then leave feedback about the video, share their favorite videos with their friends through other Web 2.0 sites (Facebook, MySpace, etc.), and receive notification when new videos from the member have been uploaded (Mullen & Wedwick, 2008). Social network sites are another form of the Web 2.0 tools that have changed the way people interact with the Internet. MySpace and Facebook are two examples of social network sites that have brought together communities of people to share in the online experience. These popular sites have drawn interest from online users because it allows members to find and socialize with friends, to make new connections with people of similar interests, and to share ideas with those connections (boyd & Ellison, 2007). Other Web 2.0 tools include blogs, wikis, RSS feeds, and social bookmarking. Each of these tools allows users to create, edit, and share information with a community of subscribers (Bleicher, 2006; OReilly, 2007; Thompson, 2008).

11

Pedagogy and Constructivist Theory Traditional instructional strategies include lecture and teacher led learning activities. However, many researchers today have found that these strategies simply do not work in the current technology age (Switzer, 2004; McLoughlin & Lee, 2007). Pedagogical changes are needed in schools in order to actively engage the Net Generation. Teacher led instruction is no longer an accepted practice although many teachers still use this method. More educators are leaning on the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky. Both researchers have implicated that learning is built upon the knowledge gained by ones environment. Vygotskys Theory of Social Constructivism (1978) is based on learners gathering information from the environment around them and the collaboration with the people that are found within that environment (Learning Theory, 2010). Web 2.0 has made its way into the constructivist learning theory. According to researchers, Web 2.0 provides a forum for collaborative learning where students are active participants in their own learning (Switzer, 2004; Taylor, Casto, & Walls; 2002; McLoughlin & Lee, 2007). Constructivist theory shies away from the traditional teacher led environment and puts teacher into a facilitator role. The teachers role is to provide direction and scaffold information for the task; students then utilize tools that will help students complete the task. The students role in learning is to combine the new knowledge that is provided in order to construct their own meaning from the knowledge. The use of wikis, blogs, and social networks sites have created online communities that have been extended into education. The Internet has opened up many avenues for online collaboration. Constructivist methods of learning have been proven to be most beneficial

12

to students in order to learn. Using Web 2.0 tools in the classroom helps motivate students to learn meaningful, authentic lessons (Reich, 2008). Web 2.0 in the Classroom Applying Web 2.0 in the classroom takes effort on the part of the teacher, especially if the teacher is not familiar with Web 2.0 tools. Thompson (2008) suggested that teachers who are new to Web 2.0 application should start small, find one application and take time to integrate it into the lesson. Even teachers who are more fluent in technology find that planning lessons and setting up the classroom environment does take time (Adams, 2008). Using Web 2.0 tools in the classroom can provide students with team building and collaboration skills. One researcher noted that using wikis to enhance a Pre-AP English course helped to reinforce those skills. The class used wikis to create online literature circles. Groups were formed to discuss different types of literature and the issues that were raised using social discourse. Each group created a content rich wiki using additional Web 2.0 tools such as Voicethread.com and wordle.net about their chosen book (Moreillon, Hunt, & Ewing, 2009). Google Applications are another source of Web 2.0 tools that are available. Applications such as the ones below provide online collaborative learning. 1. Google Docs: online document tools such as a word processor, spreadsheets, presentations software, drawings, and forms. Each of these documents can be shared and edited by others online. 2. Google Calendar: online calendar that can created for specific events or communities. Calendars can be shared and edited by members of each calendar.

13

3. Google Groups: online discussion board where users can start a topic and members can add to the discussion. 4. Gtalk: online chat that can be created for a community of members. Users can see when a person is online and be able to communicate in real time. These tools were used by one researcher to create an online community forum inside the classroom. These applications allowed the teacher to upload presentations to Google Docs and permitted peer collaboration using presentation and word processing software, answer questions in real time using Gtalk and Google groups to open discussion for assignments (Adams, 2008). Barlow (2008) used a blog and podcasts to increase student intrinsic motivation to learn science. A blog was set up and updated regularly with current real world science information that was interesting to students. Although viewing the blog was not a requirement of the class, the researcher was able to motivate students to visit the blog and review the content. Eventually the researcher created a weekly digital broadcast known as a podcast to increase interest in the site. Web traffic to the site increased over the course of the school year which signified to the researcher that students were accessing the website on a regular basis. Research has been conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of Web 2.0 in the classroom. One study examined two class field trips in which both classes utilized Ultra Mobile Personal Computers (UMPCs) (So, Seow, & Looi, 2009). The first class was directed at landmarks to answer pre-determined questions on UMPCs. Once the students returned to school they would write about their experience using a web blog. Typically web blogs are open for anyone to view and review the blog. However, the blog was closed to the public and only the student who wrote the blog had access to the

14

information they had written. The researchers had noted that the students were not engaged in the environment where the field trip had taken place. Students were mainly focusing on the task of recording answers to the questions. Also, students engaged in no interaction or collaboration from the blogs that were written about their fieldtrip. The second group used Google Maps to locate the landmarks they visited and add notes that could be viewed by all students. Students were able to ask questions, answer questions posed by their peers, and add comments about each landmark. Students from this trip engaged in their environment and related what they had seen with each other in context with their own lives. Using this tool the students were able to add meaning and provide in depth discourse compared to the first class. Byrne (2009) found that adding a student created wiki as part of unit on Africa increased student engagement. Students had to design and add content rich information to the wiki. Each student was assigned a page to design about their subject in Africa. The researcher noted that the openness of the wiki to the entire class gave the students an incentive to create and compete for the best wiki page. Murphy & LeBans (2008) surveyed teachers who were implementing Web 2.0 tools, such as wikis, blogs, and videoconferencing about the success of using these tools in the classroom. Of the fortyfive teachers surveyed, 76% reported that students tended to be more engaged in learning and engaged in wider range of learning and 66% reported that student worked remained constant or improved overall.

15

Implications and Benefits of Web 2.0 in the Classroom The advent of Web 2.0 has opened up many opportunities for the classroom. Many researchers have found that using Web 2.0 tools such as wikis and blogs increase student engagement (Boulos, Maraba, & Wheeler, 2006; Sendall, Cuccucci, & Peslak, 2008; McLouglin & Lee, 2007). No longer are students chained to a desk writing notes. Instead they are online and collaborating with peers, constructing their own learning environments, and exploring the world around them (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007). Students are more prepared now than ever to embrace the Web 2.0 learning. Many of todays students have grown up with technology and are often referred to as the Net Generation (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005). The Net Generation has quite an extensive knowledge of social media and is highly skilled at Web 2.0 applications. Researchers have found that harnessing education based on these skills improves student engagement (Reich, 2005). However, Sendall, et al. (2008) found that many teachers are not interested in using Web 2.0 applications in their classrooms. Lack of resources, training, confidence, and access keep many teachers from using Web 2.0 tools in the class. The use of wikis, RSS feeder, podcasts, and social networking sites in the classroom has presented many opportunities to engage students in higher-order thinking skills such as synthesis and evaluation. According to Riech (2008), the use of wikis and blogs, has shown that students using technology tend to write more and give a more in depth understanding of the material. One reason for higher achievement levels in students who use Web 2.0 applications is the students are more enthusiastic about using the technology. Also, there is a sense of pressure from their peers when their work is on a public forum.

16

Institutional and Instructional Barriers Although Web 2.0 has been hyped as a great tool for engaging the Net Generation, many barriers exist that keep Web 2.0 from becoming an effective teaching tool. Institutional barriers are often problematic and keep students from engaging in tools that would assist in learning. Geoff Hendrick (2009) lists several key reasons why Web 2.0 is not actively used in schools. 1. Teacher lack of knowledge and confidence in Web 2.0, 2. Lack of safe places to gain experience with using Web 2.0 tools in teaching, 3. Concerns about cyber safety and cyber-bullying, 4. Professional risk of allowing students access to popular social networking sites, 5. Limited bandwidth for effective delivery of rich Web 2.0 media, and 6. Inability to provide access to educationally-relevant content from blocked sites. Other researchers have found that institutional barriers such as lack of equipment, technology personnel, security (both student safety and data security), and a general lack of understanding of the benefits of using Web 2.0 in the classroom appeared to keep many districts from adopting the use of Web 2.0 tools (Reich, 2008; Boulos, Maramba, & Wheeler, 2006; Stansbury, 2009). Another area of concern about implementing Web 2.0 skills in the classroom is the digital divide. The digital divide refers to the haves and have nots in the technology revolution (technologysource.org). Reich (2008) discovered that the digital

17

divide plays a role in the use of Web 2.0 applications in urban schools that had high minority populations. Schools that fall into the have-not category will make a difference in the level of 21st century skills that businesses are demanding of high school graduates. The researcher also discovered that students in poorer districts that did have technology were using the Web 2.0 tools in teacher centered environments rather than the student centered collaboration that Web 2.0 provided that wealthier school districts were able to harness. This could lead to an achievement gap in the technology skills that Sendall, et al. specified in their research that students will need if they are to survive in todays job market. Technology changes at a quick pace, unfortunately curriculum standards have not. Teachers are often in charge of instruction in their classrooms and often have little time to plan their lessons. The use of technology for many teachers is a sidebar in their daily lessons. One researcher noted that teachers are often not trained on how to utilize technology in their classrooms. Technology can only do so much to enhance a lesson if teachers are not trained how to implement it effectively in the classroom (Sendall, et al., 2008). Another study noted that teachers felt that learning the technology took up too much time that could be spent on planning lessons (Liu & Hang, 2005). Moreover, teachers lack of confidence was reflected in the ability to integrate technology and Internet tools in their classroom. Yuen and Ma (2008) found that teachers perceived computer self-efficacy played a major role in adapting technology into their lessons. With many new teachers who are currently digital natives, theoretically technology should become widely used throughout the schools and in classrooms. However, Reich (2008) noted that this may not be the case. New teachers are typically trained or mentored by

18

older teachers who often do not use technology in their classrooms. Most often, teachers draw on their previous experience as students to develop their own teaching skills. Although many of the new teachers have the knowledge of using Web 2.0 skills fluently, a lack of hands on experience may prevent new teachers from utilizing those skills in the classroom. However, Taylor, Casto, and Walls (2002), found that teachers who are adequately trained and supported in implementing technology in the classroom will continue to use technology to provide rich, student centered learning environments. Summary Like many technological advances, there will always be those who embrace it and those who think it will fade away like so many other novel technologies. However, it is important to look at trends such as Web 2.0 tools and applications and realize the educational implications and benefits to students it provides. Institutional and instructional barriers keep teachers from utilizing tools that will help provide a foundation for students entering the business world. According to the literature, it will only be when education embraces Web 2.0 skills that we can successfully give our students the keys to compete in a global marketplace.

19

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Business leaders are looking at schools to produce workers who are prepared to enter the business world with 21st century skills. In order for teachers to prepare students for todays competitive job market, resources need to be available that will develop those skills. Many of the skills that future employees will need to have will only come from hands on experience with tools like Web 2.0 inside the classroom. The objective of this case study is to examine the use of Web 2.0 in the classroom and determine what barriers may exist that prevents teachers from utilizing these tools in the classroom. Given the nature of the inquiry, a case study design proved to be the best fit. Case studies are one strategy that researchers use when they are seeking answers to how or why something is occurring (Yin, 2003). The case study is an appropriate research method for this study since case studies are designed to examine one phenomenon within a bounded system. This cases study examined one school and focused on the phenomenon of the use of Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. The research also focused on understanding why teachers may not be using Web 2.0 tools. The qualitative case study employed multiple sources to collect data. Survey, interviews, observations, and researcher field notes were used to ensure that different perspectives of the problem were examined. Case Study Research The purpose of this research study was to examine and analyze Web 2.0 use in the classroom and determine what barriers may exist that may prevent teachers from utilizing the tools. Qualitative case study was determined to be the most appropriate method for this study. The case study is one approach in qualitative research. Case study research

20

requires the researcher to observe problems or situations within the environment they are found and collect data using multiple sources for data collection. This study involved one school within a metropolitan school district. The researcher used a survey, interviews, observations, and researcher field notes in order to fully explore the overarching questions involved with this study. Merriam (1998) notes that qualitative case studies often include the following characteristics: 1. Particularistic: focus on a particular situation, event, program, or phenomenon, 2. Heuristic: case study illuminates the readers understanding of the phenomenon, 3. Inductive: case studies rely on inductive meaning, 4. Descriptive: the end product of a case study is a rich, thick description of the phenomenon under study. This study involved all four of these characteristics. The study was particularistic based on one phenomenon in a special school setting. The research focus was on the use of Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. The school in this study provides a therapeutic environment for students with severe emotional and behavioral disorders. Heuristic is defined as exploring meaning or promoting discovery or learning (websterdictionary.org). This study was designed to further the researchers understanding of the use of Web 2.0 tools in the classroom and discover meaning from the research; therefore this study was heuristic in nature. This case study was also inductive. Inductive means to make generalizations about facts (dictionary.com). In qualitative research a researcher will take all the facts to confer meaning and make generalizations based on those facts. Since this case study involved obtaining multiple data sets that were analyzed, the

21

researcher is faced with the task of coding data into meaningful relationships, Then categories were examined and re-examined until the researcher could formulate a conclusion based on the data. The study was also descriptive since the findings were narrated in thick descriptive dialogue in order to fully articulate the phenomenon. The process of this qualitative case study research included the following: 1. Identify a problem or phenomenon, 2. Establish overarching questions to frame the inquiry, 3. Use of multiple forms of data, 4. Triangulate the data to ensure validity, 5. Analysis and coding of data, and 6. Report findings based on analysis. Once the problem or phenomenon had been identified and the overarching questions formulated to frame the study, the data needed to be collected. Research instruments were created to collect data. Location and Subjects The location of the research occurred at an urban high school that provides a therapeutic environment for severe emotional and behaviorally disturbed children. There are approximately 110 students enrolled in the program and an average of 7 students per class. The school consists of 13 special education teachers and 4 regular education teachers. All teachers were invited to participate in the study. Of the 17 employed, 11 teachers took part in the study.

22

Design Approach and Instruments In order to gather pertinent data for this research study the instruments that were designed will be discussed in detail. Survey research is one method of data collection used in qualitative research. Surveys are used obtain data from the sample population and is analyzed with other data sources (Yin, 2003). The survey was designed using dichotomous questions and a Likert Scale. Dichotomous questions simply asked the participant to select yes or no. A Likert Scale is a psychometric scale designed to rate responses to different questions. In this study the Likert Scales provided a five-point rating ranging from never to always. Selecting never indicated the participant never used the tool and selecting always indicated the participant always used the tool. The first section of the survey asked for demographic information. This section provided general information about participants in the study. Information included the number of years taught, grade currently teaching, and highest level of education. The second section of the survey used dichotomous questions about the participants use of basic computer tools and applications. The third section of the survey included a Likert Scale about Internet use that included Web1.0 tools and Web 2.0 tools. This section was used to generalize which internet tools were more commonly used by the participants. The survey (Figure 2) was administered through the participants work email through surveymonkey.com. Participants had one week to complete the survey.

23

24

25

Figure 2. Web 2.0 Survey Figure 2. Section 2 of survey instrument asked participants for general demographic information about their job and education. Section 3 of survey asked participants about their general use of basic computer use. Section 4 of survey used a Likert Scale to determine frequency of Internet tool use by the participants. Survey link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/JCQQHV8

26

After the survey was administered, interviews were set up using mostly openended questions in order to promote more thoughtful answers. The interview is a very important aspect of case studies since they provide the researcher with insight that would not be obtained from surveys alone (Yin, 2003). All participants who completed the survey were asked to volunteer for interviews. All participants expressed that they would participate in the interview however only six teachers were selected, one from every grade level (8th-12th) and the library media specialist. Choosing one participant from each grade level helped the researcher understand the needs from the perspective of each grade. The library media specialist was chosen because the library has the schools computer lab and the library media specialist is in charge of the time and use of the computer lab. The interview questions were designed to examine each teachers thoughts about technology and the use of Web 2.0 in the classroom and to better understand the thoughts and needs of teachers. The following interview protocol was used (Figure 3)

27

Figure 3. Interview Protocol Figure 3. The Interview Protocol was used during interviews with classroom teachers.

Also, district technology coaches and trainers were asked to participate in the study. District technology coaches train teachers how to use technology in the classroom. District technology coaches are available to work with teachers at their school and would be able to provide valuable information about the use of Web 2.0 tools in the classroom.

28

Participants were asked to fill out an online interview in the form of a survey questionnaire delivered via surveymonkey.com and email was used to follow-up and to clarify answers to the questions. Fontana and Frey (2000) noted the use of electronic means in interviews can save the researcher time and travel expense and also provide a recorded entry of the interview. Each participant was asked the same five questions and then given the opportunity to leave additional comments about Web 2.0 training and use. The researcher then followed up through email to clarify any concerns the researcher had about their statements. Three participants responded to questions and follow-up emails. The purposes of the questions were to determine if district coaches views about Web 2.0 in the classroom followed the views of the teachers that participated in the study. The following Survey was use (Figure 4)

29

Figure 4. Electronic Interview Protocol Figure 4. The Electronic Interview Protocol was used for interview questions that were asked electronically to the districts technology coaches and trainers. Two classroom observations were conducted during the course of the study (Figure 5). Each observation lasted twenty minutes and participants were selected from those who asked to volunteer. Observations are important in case study research because unlike interviews it gives the researcher unbiased information and examines the environment that the case study is investigating (Hancock & Algozinne, 2006). One observation occurred in a 9th grade English classroom and the other occurred in the library with a 10th grade class. The purpose of the observation was to examine the type of technology used by the teacher and students. During the observation the researcher was a

30

nonparticipant observer meaning that the researcher recorded the situation being observed without actively becoming involved (Gay, Mills & Airasian, 2009).

Figure 5. Observation Protocol Figure 5. The Observation Protocol was used during classroom observations of participants. Field notes were recorded throughout the research study. Field notes typically follow observations and include time, date, setting and events that took place (Merriam, 1998). Once observations were complete the researcher recorded information about the classroom setting and the technology that was available and used by the participants in the study. This included information about student computers and teacher use of the

31

technology in the classroom. Field notes also included classroom inventory of technology of all classrooms in the school including the types and models of the computers found. Data and Data Collection The purpose of this case study was to examine teacher use of Web 2.0 tools, their perceptions of the tools and to determine what barriers may exist that prevent teachers from using Web 2.0 tools for classroom instruction. Data collection for this study occurred during the Spring semester of 2011 through the month of February and March. Data collected included a survey instrument that documented demographic information, computer skills, and Internet use. In addition to the survey, interviews and classroom observations took place. Interviews included mainly open-ended questions with the participants from the school in the study and electronic interviews with district technology coaches and trainers. Observations of two classrooms were also conducted as well. Each observation lasted twenty minutes and was transcribed once the observations were completed. Research field notes entailed classroom observations of technology available that were used by the teachers and students and technology that was currently available for use in the classroom. In order to validate the research the data sets were aligned with the following overarching questions to ensure triangulation (Table 1).

32

Table 1 Triangulation Matrix Overarching Questions Which Web 2.0 tools are being utilized in the classroom If Web 2.0 tools are not being utilized, what are reasons preventing use Do teachers who have training in Web 2.0 tools utilize them more than those who have not been trained, and if so why? What are some of the barriers preventing teachers who do not utilize Web 2.0 from using the tools as an educational medium? Data Set 1 Interview with classroom teachers Interview with classroom teachers Interview with classroom teachers Data Set 2 Classroom observations Data Set 3 Survey on computer skills and Internet use Researchers field notes

Classroom Observations

Electronic interviews with technology coaches

Classroom observation

Interview with classroom teachers

Electronic interviews with technology coaches

Researchers field notes

Each question was designed as part of the framework for this case study. Triangulation of the data was used to ensure the appropriate analysis was being derived from the data by matching data sets with the overarching questions. Validity of qualitative research is often questioned due to the nature of the research. In qualitative research the researcher is often part of the environment that is being investigated. Data collected is often based on a persons thoughts or feelings and the information cannot be

33

duplicated. Defining an operational set of measures in qualitative research is difficult because the data is subjective. One way to help validate qualitative research is to use multiple sources of evidence and to establish a chain of evidence (Yin, 2000). Triangulation of the overarching questions with the data sets helps to ensure that conclusions are drawn from different sources. Procedures and Timeline The steps involved in data collection included an anonymous survey that detailed teachers proficiency in computer skills and Internet applications and use. The survey was created using surveymonkey.com, an online survey site that allows users to create surveys and email or place on a website. Since all participants had email addresses issued by the district those emails were used to send the link to the survey. Participants were given directions on how to fill out the survey in the email that was sent. Participants were given one week to complete the survey. The next step in the process was conducting interviews with teachers. Participants were asked to volunteer for the survey. Since all participants agreed to be interviewed one teacher from each grade level and the library media specialist were chosen to be interviewed. Each set up a time during the teachers planning period. The interview process spanned over a week in order to accommodate schedules. The interviews included open-ended questions that allowed the researcher to follow up on their responses as needed. Each interview was transcribed immediately after so that it could be coded later. Also, the district technology coaches and trainers were asked to participate in an electronic interview that included open-ended questions. Participants used a form generated by surveymonkey.com that include five open-ended questions and a page for

34

comments about Web 2.0 trainings and use in classrooms. Follow-up emails were used to clarify any statements made by the Technology Coaches. Two participants were asked to be observed during their instructional class time in order for the researcher to see how technology was being used in the classroom. One participant asked to be observed and the other participant was chosen and asked based on scheduled computer lab time in the library. Each observation lasted approximately twenty minutes. During the observation, the researcher noted the type of lesson that was being presented, the type of technology that was being used, and other types of technology that was observed in the classroom. Field notes were an on-going occurrence throughout the study. The researcher took notes about the technology that was found in classrooms and throughout the school. Also during observations notes were taken regarding the types of technology being used by the teachers who were being observed. Notes were transcribed in a researcher field journal and used as part of the data analysis. The timeline of when the data collected is outlined in Table 2.

Table 2 Timeline of Data Collection Data Collected Internet Survey Interviews with Teachers Researcher Field Notes Electronic Interviews Observations Dates Collected 2/23/2011 to 3/1/2011 2/28/2011 to 3/4/2011 2/23/2011 to 3/10/2011 3/1/2011 to 3/3/2011 3/9/2100 to 3/10/2011 Number of Participants 11 6 1 3 2

35

Data Analysis Data analysis began with coding of the data. Coding is used to identify the context of the data in order to be categorized. Coding began during the data collection process in order to help organize the data. Simple codes were used as identifiers. For example, teachers were assigned codes T1, T2, T3, etc. Technology coaches were identified as TC1, TC2 and TC3. After the researcher had completed the coding of data gathered, a process of identifying emerging themes began from the survey, interviews, observations, and field notes. Reflection on the data requires the researcher to look at the big picture and then identify themes that have emerged (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009). The triangulation matrix was revisited and the researcher identified themes and patterns that emerged from each overarching question and the data sets and subsets. This was done through a process transcribing bits of information on index cards (Appendix E) and color coding data from the data sets. The researcher examined the data sets and highlighted information from the index cards in order to find commonalities among the data. Identifying themes is a process of examining and reexamining data until all possible themes and patterns have been realized (Craig, 2009). Data was reexamined multiple times until all possible themes had emerged. Emerging themes were then recorded on the triangulation matrix next to each overarching question. Once all emerging themes had been identified, the process of categorizing data began. In order to code the data that was transcribed on the index cards each card was reviewed. Each card then received a code in order to be placed into categories according to the data sets. Codes included setting, situation, event, and relationship codes (Craig, 2009). Each card with the corresponding code was assigned a category to correspond

36

with the overarching questions. A graphic organizer was created using Microsoft publisher to categorize the information. The final stage of data analysis occurred when all categories have been revealed and the researcher determined attributes that stemmed from all data sets and subsets. Attributes are the characteristics or information that is found to be common among all data sets. The attributes are used to help lay the ground work of the final analysis and report of findings. Summary Overall, qualitative case study research is an appropriate method for this research. It encompasses the use of Internet surveys, observations, electronic interviews, and researcher field notes in order to explore the topic of the research. Data analysis included a triangulation matrix in order to ensure that the validity of the data is preserved and the findings will be written using thick descriptive narrative in order to articulate what the data produces.

37

CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS Introduction to Analysis Case study research involves the collection of multiple data sets and entails the researcher to sort through all the data and derive meaning. This can be a tremendous task. Case study research requires an ongoing analysis of data in order to formulate conclusions as well as clarify research questions (Hancock & Algozzine, 2006). Data analysis should occur at the time that the data is received in order to efficiently process the information. Meriam states (1988), Data that has been analyzed while being collected is both parsimonious and illuminating (p.124). In other words, it saves the researcher time later since information is fresh and easily recalled. Also, the ongoing analysis helps in continually identify emerging themes. Case study research can be a painstaking process with the abundant amount of data that is collected during the course of research. However, analyzing data and coding it throughout the study will make the process easier when formulating conclusions. Following the triangulation matrix the data can be categorized by the emerging themes and then assigned attributes for each category. This helps the researcher formulate conclusions based on all the data that was collected. Analysis of Data Case study research involves ongoing data analysis and interpretation. Gay, et al. (2009) noted three criteria for classifying research data: 1. Becoming familiar with the data and identifying potential themes, 2. Examining the data in depth to provide detailed descriptions of the setting, participants, and activity, and

38

3. Categorizing and coding pieces of data and grouping them into themes (p.449). During the course of research each data set collected from the survey, interviews, informal interviews, and research field notes, were examined for emerging themes and coded and categorized. The process of coding helps identify emerging themes that will later be categorized. Coding helps reduce the data into a manageable format (Gay, et al., 2009). Data was manually coded from the survey, interviews, and researcher field notes. This was a process that was done by transcribing bits of information from the data onto index cards and then assessing themes that emerged from the data and creating relevant categories (Gay, et al., 2009). Codes that were used in the analysis included setting, situation, event, and relationship codes. Setting codes included information about the setting or the location including the environment. Situation codes included information about the teachers thoughts or feelings about the subject being examined. Event codes were used to categorize information that was part of the participants daily activities. Overall Relationship codes were used when analyzing similar situations among the data sets and subsets (Craig, 2009). Once categories had been established from the data the categories were then further established using the seven guidelines as outlined by Guba and Lincoln (as cited in Merriam, 1988): 1. Include any information that is germane to the area and not excluded by boundary setting rules, 2. Include any information that relates or bridges several already existing information items, 3. Include any information that identifies new elements or brings them to surface,

39

4. Add any information that reinforces existing information, but reject it if the reinforcement is merely redundant, 5. Add any new information that tends to explain other information already known, 6. Add any information that exemplifies either the nature of the category or important evidence within the category, and 7. Add any information that tends to refute or challenge already known information.

After information was coded the process then entailed creating a graphic organizer using Microsoft Publisher that allowed the researcher to organize the data in a meaningful way and to visually see the relationship among coded data and data sets. As the research progressed, utilizing the above steps during and after the data collection made analyzing the data a manageable task and helped keep the research within the outlined framework of the study. Categories were aligned within the framework of the overarching questions that were the basis for this study. Attributes from the data were assigned to each of the categories to help interpret the meaning of the data (Table 3).

40

Table 3 Categories, Patterns, Relationships

Overarching Questions Which Web 2.0 tools are being utilized in the classroom?

Category Web 2.0?

Attribute Most teachers did not know what Web 2.0 is Teachers who did know were not using it Computers were being used as basic research instruments (Web 1.0) Teachers only use computers for demonstrations or incentives 100% teachers reported they are proficient in basic computer applications (MS Office, email, etc.) Very little use of Web 2.0 applications All classrooms have at least 3 computers available (most are over 5 years old) Only 4 classrooms have projectors available

Whats a computer for?

I got skills!

If Web 2.0 tools are not being utilized, what are the reasons preventing use? This is what we have!

Ive got my reasons?

Do teachers who have training in Web 2.0 tools utilize it more than those who have not been trained?

Teach me please!

Training Confidence (for teachers use and student use) Not enough computers in the classroom Computers are slow and outdated 2 teachers reported to have training in Web 2.0 tools.

Can you use it?

Teachers who had training were not using Web 2.0 in the classroom for various reasons

41

Table 3 Categories, Patterns, Relationships What are some of the barriers that We got are preventing teachers who do not what we utilize Web 2.0 tools from using got! the tools as an educational medium? No projectors available for most teachers. Computers are old and sometimes crash when using web tools. Not enough computers for all students Only 2 teachers reported having any type of professional development on using Web 2.0 tools No full time technology coach available on staff to help with implementation. Student access to many Web 2.0 websites is restricted by school filters Student do not have parental consent for internet on file Monitoring student internet behavior is lacking

I need help!

Safety First

Validity and trustworthiness are essential elements to research. Triangulation of data is utilized in order to establish the trustworthiness of data since it involves using multiple data sets to validate the research. The use of multiple data sets in qualitative case study will result in findings that are more accurate and convincing (Yin, 2000). Data Analysis Timeline The study was designed to begin during the Spring semester of 2011 and concluded in March of 2011. The following timeline will detail when data analysis took place.

42

Table 4 Data Analysis Timeline Data Analysis Procedure Survey Time Frame Analysis began once the time frame for collection ended. Information was printed on index cards for coding. Interview responses were transcribed and numbered then coded and analyzed as received. Once completed results were compared with the rest of data that was collected. Observations were transcribed and numbered. Afterward, the notes were coded and colored coded on index cards to be examined during analysis. Data was coded as research took place. Once research was complete it was further processed with the rest of the data collected and transcribed on index cards to be categorized.

Interviews

Observations

Field Notes

During the first week of the research phase surveys were being completed and interviews were being conducted. Information from the interview responses were transcribed immediately following the interviews while the information was still fresh. Survey information was coded after the seven day time frame given to participants. The second week of research included two observations. Both observations were transcribed on the days they were conducted. Coding of the observations took place within twenty four hours of the observations. Electronic interviews with the district technology coaches were copied into a word processor and numbered then coded. Additional follow-up

43

information from emails was added as received and coded concurrently. Field research notes were continuously updated and coded throughout the study. Summary The nature of this research was a case study of an urban high school to determine why teachers were not utilizing Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. This chapter examined data analysis procedures that validated the use of data collections instruments used in this case study research. As Stake (2000) noted The purpose of the case study is not to represent the world, but to represent the case and is the goal of this thesis to represent this particular case within this particular school setting.

44

Chapter V: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Introduction This research was conducted to examine what Web 2.0 tools were being used in the classroom. Further, the research also attempted to determine what barriers were keeping teachers from using these tools in the classroom. This chapter examines the finding in depth and draws conclusions based on those findings. In addition to the findings, recommendations and suggestions for future research are discussed. Findings After the research concluded and the data were coded and categorized, the overarching questions and the triangulation matrix were revisited to further analyze themes that presented from each question. Analysis of each theme helped to develop in depth meaning from the findings. The figures below display the triangulation of each overarching question. Themes and analysis of each overarching question will follow to detail the findings.

45

Classroom Observations

Interview with classroom teachers

Which Web 2.0 tools are being utilized in the classroom?

Survey on computer skills and Internet use

Figure 6. Overarching Question Triangulation Matrix Figure 6: Overarching Question #1: Which Web 2.0 tools are currently being utilized in the classroom?

Themes that emerged from overarching question #1 and the attributes from each theme: Teachers do not know what Web 2.0 is. o Most teachers did not know what Web is, o Teachers who did know were not using Web 2.0 in the classroom. Technology that is available is not being used for Web 2.0. o Computers were being used as basic research instruments, o Teachers only used computers for demonstrations and incentives Teacher used Web 1.0 tools. o Teacher were proficient in Web 1.0 applications, and o Limited use of Web 2.0 tools.

46

Given the literature about the benefits of the using Web 2.0 in the classroom to engage students, it is apparent that tools like Web 2.0 cannot be effective if teachers are not aware of what it is or the benefits to the students. Only two teachers reported that they knew what Web 2.0 is. Although the teachers did know what Web 2.0 is neither teacher was using the tools as part of classroom instruction. According to the survey on Internet use, most teachers used basic Web 1.0 tools (Figure 7). The majority used Email (91%) and search engines (82%), but once Web 2.0 tools were introduced such as blogs and podcasts the percentages shifted to infrequently to never.

Web 2.0 Survey

Inte rne t Use Answe r Op tio ns Email Search Engines (Google, Yahoo, ect.) Wikipedia Blogs Social Networks (Nings, Facebook, MySpace) Podcasts RSS Feeds Google Applications (Google Docs, Calendar, ect.) Ne ve r 0% 0% 9% 27% 27% 46% 64% 37% Infre q ue ntly 0% 0% 18% 37% 27% 0% 27% 27% So me time s 0% 9% 46% 18% 0% 45% 0% 27% Fre q ue ntly 9% 9% 27% 18% 9% 9% 0% 0% Alwa ys 91% 82% 0% 0% 37% 0% 9% 9%

Figure 7. Web 2.0 Survey Results Figure 7. Web 2.0 Survey results showing the percentage of each internet tool that participants used based on frequency.

When teachers were given a brief explanation of what Web 2.0 tools are, one teacher noted,

47

Oh yeah, I have a Facebook [account], but I dont use it very often (Open Ended Interview, March 3, 2011, T4). and another teacher shared, The kids cant use social networking sites at school, they are all blocked. Besides the students wouldnt do any work if they could get on it (Open Ended Interview, February 28, 2011, T2) Classroom teachers who did use technology in the classroom used technology such as projectors and Internet for basic presentations and research. Students observed in the library media center were using Google to research information from basic websites. Wikipedia was used during the course of the observation. However, it was used only as an information website. Web 2.0 tools were not used at all. This was further substantiated by the survey questions about teacher use of internet tools and from interviews with teachers about the use of technology in the classroom.

48

Classroom Observations

Interviews with classroom teachers

If Web 2.0 tools are being utilized, what are the reasons preventing use.

Researchers Field Notes

Figure 8. Overarching Question #2 Triangulation Matrix Figure 8: Overarching Question #2: If Web 2.0 tools are not being utilized, what are the reasons preventing use?

Themes that emerged from overarching question #2 and the attributes from each theme: Resources are not available o All classrooms have at least 3 student computers, and o Only 4 classrooms currently use projectors. Reason for not using Web 2.0 o Training, o Confidence, o Lack of resources available, and o Outdated resources. Further analysis of the use of Web 2.0 tools in this school revealed that there were reasons that teachers were not using then tools. The study revealed that there were a few

49

teachers who knew what Web 2.0 is. When those teachers were asked if they use it in the classroom one teacher stated, Not very often, kids would have to share and resources are very limited (Open Ended Interview, February, 28, 2011, T2) Another teacher noted, Students are not at an adequate level of comfort [with technology] (Open Ended Interview, March 3, T6). This is a surprising result when compared with a question about student learning and technology. Many of the teachers responded that students learn better using technology. One teacher stated, I think they learn better with technologyit engages them longer (Open Ended Interview, March 1, 2011, T5). Another teacher also said, Many of our students have grown up with technology such as computers and the Internet. I think those things come naturally to them (Open Ended Interview, March 3, 2011, T4) Student use of technology seems like an important issue to most teachers, yet many of them do not access the technology they have available to them. Researcher field notes and classroom observations indicated that most classrooms have at least three student computers available for use. The school involved in this case study currently is equipped with a computer lab that is located in the library media center. It has a total of twelve student computers. However, at any given time only about six of them are in proper working order. There is

50

also a technology lab at the school that is used for instructional classes and in most classrooms there are two to three student computers available. Upon observation of computer use in the classroom, teachers utilized basic research skills (Web 1.0) as part of a lesson, using search engines to simply look up information. Student interaction with the Internet was limited and no use of Web 2.0 tools occurred during classroom observations. In some classrooms, computer use was provided as an incentive for students who completed their class work. There are currently only three classrooms that utilize projectors and two are personal projectors that the teachers brought in to use in their class. There are three school projectors available for the school, while two have been checked out and assigned to teachers, only one of those is being actively used. Teachers who do have projectors use it mainly for PowerPoint presentations and videos.

Electronic Interview with Technology Coachers

Interview with classroom teachers

Do teachers who have training in Web 2.0 tools utilize it more than those who have not been trained and if so, why?

Classroom Observations

Figure 9. Overarching Question #3 Triangulation Matrix Figure 9: Overarching Question #3: Do teachers who have training in Web 2.0 tools utilize them more than those who have been trained and if so, why?

51

Themes that emerged from the third overarching question: Most teachers do not have training in Web 2.0 tools. o 2 teachers reported training in Web 2.0 tools. Web 2.0 is not being used o Teachers were not using Web 2.0 in the class. Teachers seem to be most comfortable using Web 1.0 tools such as search engines and email. However, when asked about Web 2.0 tools, some teachers had little to no experience using tools like Podcasts and Google Applications. Web 2.0 is still a foreign term to most teachers and once provided with a brief explanation most teachers understood what it meant. However, when asked, most could not name a practical application of Web 2.0 in their classroom. One teacher did note It would be great to have student social network site like Edmodo for the students to useCollaboration is going to be a must in learning environment and at work (Open Ended Interview, March 3, 2011, T6). This insight reaffirms that some teachers are aware of the need for Web 2.0 and 21st century skills in the classroom. While training is offered at the district level, many schools lack the benefit of technology coaches that are assigned to their schools. Almost all teachers answered no when asked if the school had a technology coach or assumed the computer class teacher or the Technical Support Specialist was the technology coach for the school. Although technology coaches can be requested via the districts technology website, none of the teachers have ever requested for one to come to their classroom. When

52

asked why teachers did not request the use of the technology coach, one teacher stated, I didnt even know that was available (Open Ended Interview, March 2, 2011, T1). Technology workshops are also offered throughout the year at the districts professional development training center. When asked about teachers who do take the courses on Web 2.0, the technology coach responded about 10% to 20% (Open Ended Interview, March 1, 2011, TC1) take the tools and implement them in the class and another one responded I think few of them are not, because it takes a paradigm shift and changing a lot of how you have taught in the past (Open Ended Interview, March 1, 2011, TC2) The districts technology coaches also noted the need for on-site school coaches. One technology coach noted that providing in school support as opposed to district level support and develop[ing] lessons with the teachers and model[ing] the teaching with Web 2.0 would greatly increase classroom use (Open Ended Interview, March 1, 2011, TC1) The use of ongoing support was a big issue with teachers. When asked if teachers would use the resources provided by technology coaches all interview participants said they would use the resources if they were available. One stated, Yes I would use their help, I am not technology literate and I need someone who can show me how to use this stuff (Open Ended Interview, March 2, 2011, T3). Another teacher shared,

53

I would use their assistance if one what actually available Open Ended Interview, March 3, 2011, T4).

Electronic interviews with technology coaches

Interview with classroom teachers

What are some of the barriers that are preventing teachers who do not utilize Web 2.0 tools from using the tools as an educational medium?

Research Field Notes

Figure 10: Overarching Question #4 Triangulation Matrix Figure 10: Overarching Question #4: What are some of the barriers preventing teachers who do utilize Web 2.0 tools in the classroom from using the tools as an educational medium? Themes that emerged from fourth overarching question and the attributes from each theme: Technology and training not available at school o Only two teacher reported Web 2.0 training, and o No full time technology coach available to assist teachers Limited and outdated resources. o Computers are old,

54

o No projectors are available, and o Not enough computers for all students. Safety and student behavior o Student access to Web 2.0 tools are restricted by school, o Students do not have parental consent forms on file, and o Monitoring student internet behavior is difficult. From the data it was found that several barriers exist that are preventing the use of Web 2.0 in the classroom. As mentioned above, teachers are lacking the knowledge of Web 2.0 tools and the benefits it provides to the students. This effects the use of Web 2.0 in the classroom; if teachers dont know what it is how can we ask them to use it? This pinpoints to a motivation and training issue. While most teachers are aware that the district provides technology classes and coaches there is currently no incentive for teachers to explore those classes on their own. However, when asked during the interview if the teacher would use a technology coach if one was available, all teachers stated they would. As previously mentioned, even the districts technology coaches are aware of the problem of not having a technology coach within each school and the benefit to the teachers this would provide. Another barrier that presented throughout this study was the lack of resources and outdated technology. District technology coaches and trainers were asked about teacher use of Web 2.0 in the classrooms stating that one issue is the lack of resources in the school and the use of old technology. Further investigation into the technology available at this school revealed that all computers that were currently in use were at least five years old and using Pentium 4 processors with 256 megabytes to 512 megabytes of

55

memory (RAM) and run Windows XP. Most computers on the market today have dual core and quad core processors and run on 1 gigabyte to 4 gigabytes of RAM using Windows 7 as the operating system in order to run applications that are being used by many Web 2.0 tools. This means they run more efficiently and can handle the work load of multiple applications being used simultaneously. Ultimately, the resources available cannot handle all of the applications that Web 2.0 has to offer. Figures 12 and 13 below compare a student computer at the school with a current similar base model computer from Dell.

Figure 12. System Properties of Student Computer (Dell Optiplex) Figure 12: Image of the System Properties of a student computer that shows Windows XP operating system with a Pentium 4 processor speed of 2.8 gigahertz and 504 megabytes of RAM.

56

Figure 13. Current Base Model of Dell Optiplex Figure 13: Specifications of a current Base Model of a Dell Optiplex from Dell.com. Image shows Intel Core Quad or Duo processer with Windows Vista or Windows 7 options and up to 16 gigabytes of RAM.

Furthermore, student safety and behavior was cited as another barrier. At the beginning of each school year a parent student handbook is given to each student. According to the handbook, INTERNET AND EMAIL USE POLICY - IM 4.153: Parents must sign an Internet and Email Use agreement in order for students to access the Internet at school (Student Handbook, 2011). This form ultimately states that the parent is responsible for the childs Internet use (Appendix F). However, only 31% of students enrolled at this school have Internet permission forms on record. This presents a problem about who is responsible for those students who do not have signed permission forms who are using the Internet. Essentially, students should have those forms signed before they are able to access the Internet. Teachers who let students use the Internet without

57

this form signed do in violation of district policy. However, all students who use the Internet must be monitored in order to adhere to school policies regarding online safety. Currently the school uses a program (AB Tutor) that allows the computer teacher to monitor the computer lab use. This helps eliminate some of the online behavior issues. However, it is only available for the computer lab and library and not the student computers that are located in the classrooms. Discussion In order to understand why Web 2.0 is not being used to enhance lessons and engage students, this case study revealed many of the barriers that exist with the current technology and training of teachers in this particular research site. Foremost, it is essential that teacher education and training in Web 2.0 tools must become a priority to meet the needs of a digital savvy student population. Teachers need training in order to effectively use Web 2.0 in the classroom. As this study revealed, many teachers did not know what the term Web 2.0 was and what applications were available that could be used in the classroom. However, in order to effectively use the tools in the classroom, teachers need the assistance of an on-site coach who can answer questions and help with implementation. Technology that is currently available is not being effectively utilized. On-going classroom support of technology will allow teachers to feel more comfortable and assist in gaining the necessary skills to continue using Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. Recommendations Recommendations for improving teacher use of Web 2.0 in the classroom stem from the barriers that were found through the data analysis. Educating teachers about the

58

need of 21st century skills and the benefits that Web 2.0 provides for student engagement should be a priority. Teacher training of Web 2.0 needs to be implemented on a school level. Schools should have a full-time technology coach available to help put into practice of Web 2.0 tools. Teachers, like students, need lessons modeled in order to be able to effectively use these new tools. Also, technology should be updated to equipment that can handle the applications of Web 2.0 tools. Although the computers at this particular site do well for Web 1.0 applications; Web 2.0 requires systems that are faster and can handle more applications running at one time. Student engagement and learning is lost if the technology is slow and the lesson will fall apart when the technology does not work properly. Suggestions for Future Research This case study outlined the barriers that are preventing teachers from utilizing Web 2.0 in the classroom. However, by design the focus only highlighted the views of one small program school. Further research into multiple schools using a larger sample would effectively purvey deeper meaning and outcomes that could be used to develop training that would benefit the district of this school, as well as similar districts across the nation. Additionally, this research could be expanded to include teachers who are successfully using Web 2.0 in their classrooms. This would enable the research to look at possible solutions on how to overcome the barriers that were mentioned in this study and increase the effectiveness of Web 2.0 in the classroom.

59

Summary Overall, this case study examined Web 2.0 tools in the classroom and determined the barriers that were preventing teachers from using Web 2.0 in the classroom. While Web 2.0 may be a new term for the teachers at this school, it is not a term that is lost in the business world. If students are to achieve the skills needed to enter the workforce, then schools need to provide the necessary skills. Training and resources are needed, as well as, ongoing support for teachers. Many of the teachers in this study recognized the use of technology in engaging students. However, if these barriers are not overcome, preparing our students for future jobs is lost by the lack of knowledge from teachers.

60

References 21st Century Skills. (2000). In U.S. Department of Labor, 21st Century Workforce Commission. (2000). A nation of opportunity: building america's 21st century workforce Washington, DC.: Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED442971.pdf Adams, D. (2008). Gaga for google in the twenty-first century advanced placement language classroom. Clearing House, 82(2), 96-100. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Apple Inc. (2007). Global awareness and education: americas test for the 21st century. (2007, April). Apple e-News for Education, 6(4), Retrieved from http://education.apple.com/contact_me/ALI/Global_Awareness_White_Paper2.pdf Barlow, T. (2008). Web 2.0: Creating a classroom without walls. Teaching Science - the Journal of the Australian Science Teachers Association, 54(1), 46-48. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Bleicher, P. (2006). Web 2.0 revolution: power to the people. A2pplied Clinical Trials, 15(8), 34-36. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Blog. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/blog Boulos, M., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/6/41/ boyd, d. m., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html

61

Byrne, R. (2009). The effect of web 2.0 on teaching and learning. Teacher Librarian, 37(2), 5053. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Chadwick, T. (1997). Business uses of the internet. Retrieved from http://www.tbchad.com/bususe.html Craig, D. (2009). Action research essentials. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Digital Divide. (n.d.). In Technology Source online dictionary. Retrieved October 15, 2010, from http://technologysource.org/extra/20/definition/3/ Digital Natives. (n.d.). In MacMillan dictionary online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.macmillandictionary.com/buzzword/entries/digital-native.html Fontana, A., & Frey, J. (2000). The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (2nd Ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 645-869). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Gates, W. (1999). Business at the speed of thought. New York: Warner Books. Gay, L., Mills, G., & Airasian, P. (2009). Education research: competencies for analysis and applications (9th ed.). Upper Saddle: Pearson. Gewertz, C. (2008, October 13). States press ahead on '21st century skills'. Education Week, 28(8), Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/10/15/08skills.h28.html?print=1 Hancock, D., & Algozzine, B. (2006). Doing case study research. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Hendrick, G. (2009). Web 2.0 site blocking in schools. Education.au Limited, Retrieved from http://www.educationau.edu.au/sites/default/files/SICTAS-nsi.pdf

62

Heuristic. (n.d.). In Webster-dictionary online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.websterdictionary.org/definition/heuristic Inductive. (n.d.). In Dictionary.com online dictionary. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Inductive Internet world stats: usage and population statistics. (2010). Retrieved from http://internetworldstats.com/stats.htm Learning Theory. (2010). IN Education encyclopedia online. Retrieved from http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2174/Learning-Theory-CONSTRUCTIVISTAPPROACH.html Liu, Y., & Huang, C. (2005). Concerns of teachers about technology integration in the USA. European Journal of Teacher Education, 28(1), 35-47. doi:10.1080/02619760500039928. Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education, (2008). Educating the 21st century workforce: a call for high school reform. Retrieved from http://www.mbae.org/uploads/06102008230519EducatingA21stCenturyWorkforce.pdf McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. (2007). Social software and participatory learning: pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the web 2.0 era. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007, Retrieved from http://ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/mcloughlin.pdf Merriam, S. (1988). Case study research in education: a qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Merrow, J. (Producer). (2002). Frontline: testing our schools [Web]. Available from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/schools/interviews/wilkins.html

63

Moreillon, J., Hunt, J., & Ewing, S. (2009). Learning and teaching in WANDA wiki wonderland: literature circles in the digital commons. Teacher Librarian, 37(2), 23-28. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Mullen, R., & Wedwick, L. (2008). Avoiding the digital abyss: getting started in the classroom with youtube, digital Stories, and blogs. Clearing House, 82(2), 66-69. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Murphy, J., & Lebans, R. (2008). Unexpected outcomes: web 2.0 in the secondary school classroom. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 4(2), 134147.Retrieved from http://www.sicet.org/journals/ijttl/issue0802/4_2_5_Murphy_Lebans.pdf Net Generation. (n.d.). In Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital. New York: McGraw Hill. Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Educationg the net generation. EDUCAUSE., Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf O'Reilly, T. (2005, September 30). What is web 2.0. O'Reilly Media, Retrieved from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html Podcast. (n.d.). In Merriam-Websters online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/podcast Reich, J. (2008). Reworking the web, reworking the world: how web 2.0 is changing our society. Beyond Current Horizons, Retrieved from http://www.beyondcurrenthorizons.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/final_reich_reworkingtheweb_20081201_jb.pdf

64

RSS Feed. (n.d.). In Dictionary.com online dictionary. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/RSS+feed Sendall, Ceccucci, and Peslak (2008). Web 2.0 matters: an analysis of implementing web 2.0 in the classroom. Information Systems Education Journal, 6 (64). http://isedj.org/6/64/ . So, H., Seow, P., & Looi, C. (2009). Location matters: leveraging knowledge building with mobile devices and web 2.0 technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 367382. doi:10.1080/10494820903195389 Social Network. (n.d.) In Dictionary.com online dictionary. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/social+network Stansbery, M. (2009). Survey shows barriers to web 2.0 in schools. eSchool News, Retrieved from http://www.eschoolnews.com/2009/04/16/survey-shows-barriers-to-web-2-0-inschools/ Switzer, J. (2004). Teaching computer-mediated visual communication to a large section: a constructivist approach. Innovative Higher Education, 29(2), 89-101. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.mtsu.edu/ehost/detail?vid=9&hid=105&sid=1ed6a4e4 -0ea3-4673-b5258e6fd3869031%40sessionmgr114&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1za XRl#db=aph&AN=15123831#db=aph&AN=15123831 Tapscott, D. (2009, April 13). Best buys smart use of web 2.0 tools [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.wikinomics.com/blog/index.php/2009/04/13/best-buys-smartuse-of-web-20-tools/ Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital. New York: McGraw Hill.

65

Taylor, L., Castro, D., & Walls, R. (2004). Tools, time and strategies for integrating technology across the curriculum. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 17(2), 121-136. doi:10.1080/10720530490273908. Thompson, J. (2008). Don't be afraid to explore web 2.0. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(10), 711-778. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Thibodeau, P. (2009, March 3). Best buy getting results from social network: blue shirt nation network brings ideas from shop floor to corporate offices. Computer World, Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9128877/Best_Buy_getting_results_from_social _network_ U.S. Department of Labor, 21st Century Workforce Commission. (2000). A nation of opportunity: building america's 21st century workforce Washington, DC.: Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED442971.pdf Web 1.0 (n.d.). In PC Magazine online encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=Web+10&i=57650,00.asp Web 2.0. (n.d.). In Dictionary.com online dictionary. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Web+2.0 Wiki. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/wiki Yuen, A., & Ma, W. (2008). Exploring teacher acceptance of e-learning technology. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 229-243. doi:10.1080/13598660802232779

66

Yin, R. (2001). Case study research: design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

67

Appendices

68

Appendix A Web 2.0 Survey

69

70

71

72

Appendix B Interview Protocol

73

Appendix C Observation Protocol

74

Appendix D Electronic Interview Questions (surveymonkey.com)

75

76

77

78

79

Appendix E Index Cards Coded for Research

80

Appendix F Internet Permission Form 2010-2011

81

82

IRB Approval

February 23, 2011 Crystal Cunningham Department of Educational Leadership crystalynn.cunningham@mnps.org , dvcraig@mtsu.edu Protocol Title: Web 2.0: Understanding Teachers Perceptions and Barriers that Prevent Utilization in the Classroom Protocol Number: 11-149 Dear Investigator(s), The MTSU Institutional Review Board, or a representative of the IRB, has reviewed the research proposal identified above. The MTSU IRB or its representative has determined that the study poses minimal risk to participants and qualifies for an expedited review under 45 CFR 46.110 Category 7. Approval is granted for one (1) year from the date of this letter for 17 participants at the Johnson School. For added schools in the future the compliance office will need copies of permission letters from the school principles and school districts. According to MTSU Policy, a researcher is defined as anyone who works with data or has contact with participants. Anyone meeting this definition needs to be listed on the protocol and needs to provide a certificate of training to the Office of Compliance. If you add researchers to an approved project, please forward an updated list of researchers and their certificates of training to the Office of Compliance (c/o Emily Born, Box 134) before they begin to work on the project. Any change to the protocol must be submitted to the IRB before implementing this change. Please note that any unanticipated harms to participants or adverse events must be reported to the Office of Compliance at (615) 494-8918. You will need to submit an end-of-project form to the Office of Compliance upon completion of your research located on the IRB website. Complete research means that you have finished collecting and analyzing data. Should you not finish your research within the one (1) year period, you must submit a Progress Report and request a continuation prior to the expiration date. Please allow time for review and requested revisions. Your study expires February 23, 2012.

83

Also, all research materials must be retained by the PI or faculty advisor (if the PI is a student) for at least three (3) years after study completion. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Emily Born Compliance Officer Middle Tennessee State University eborn@mtsu.edu