SpringerLink
Log in

Technology Use in Science Instruction (TUSI): Aligning the Integration of Technology in Science Instruction in Ways Supportive of Science Education Reform

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study describes the development of an instrument to investigate the extent to which technology is integrated in science instruction in ways aligned to science reform outlined in standards documents. The instrument was developed by: (a) creating items consistent with the five dimensions identified in science education literature, (b) establishing content validity with both national and international content experts, (c) refining the item pool based on content expert feedback, (d) piloting testing of the instrument, (e) checking statistical reliability and item analysis, and (f) subsequently refining and finalization of the instrument. The TUSI was administered in a field test across eleven classrooms by three observers, with a total of 33 TUSI ratings completed. The finalized instrument was found to have acceptable inter-rater intraclass correlation reliability estimates. After the final stage of development, the TUSI instrument consisted of 26-items separated into the original five categories, which aligned with the exploratory factor analysis clustering of the items. Additionally, concurrent validity of the TUSI was established with the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol. Finally, a subsequent set of 17 different classrooms were observed during the spring of 2011, and for the 9 classrooms where technology integration was observed, an overall Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of 0.913 was found. Based on the analyses completed, the TUSI appears to be a useful instrument for measuring how technology is integrated into science classrooms and is seen as one mechanism for measuring the intersection of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge in science classrooms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick F, Bell R, Lederman N (1998) The nature of science and instructional practice: making the unnatural natural. Sci Educ 82(4):417–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adamson AE, Banks D, Burtch M, Cox F III, Judson E, Turley JB, Benford R, Lawson AE (2003) Reformed undergraduate instruction and its subsequent impact on secondary school teaching practice and student achievement. J Res Sci Teach 40(10):939–958

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993) Benchmarks for science literacy. Author, Washington, DC

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (2001) Atlas for scientific literacy. AAAS, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (2007) Atlas for scientific literacy, vol 2. AAAS, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1989) Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Anastopoulou S, Sharples M, Ainsworth S, Crook C, O’Malley C, Wright M (2012) Creating personal meaning through technology-supported science inquiry learning across formal and informal settings. Int J Sci Educ 34(2):251–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball DL, Cohen DK (1999) Develo** practice, develo** practitioners: toward a practice-based theory of professional development. In: Darling-Hammond L, Skyes G (eds) Teaching as the learning professional: handbook of policy and practice. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 3–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell R, Gess-Newsome J, Luft J (2008) Technology in the secondary science classroom. NSTA Press, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull G, Bell L (2009) TPACK: a framework for the CITE Journal. Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/editorial/article1.cfm

  • Campbell T, Bohn C (2008) Science laboratory experiences of high school students across one state in the U.S.: descriptive research from the classroom. Sci Educ 17(1):36–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell T, Neilson D (2009) Student ideas and inquiries: investigating friction in the physics classroom. Sci Act 46(1):13–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell T, Abd-Hamid N, Chapman H (2010) Development of instruments to assess teacher and student perceptions of inquiry experiences in science classrooms. J Sci Teacher Educ 21(1):13–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Catley L and Reiser (2005). Tracing a prospective learning progression for develo** understanding of evolution. Paper Commissioned by the National Academies Committee on Test Design for K-12 Science Achievement. http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/Evolution.pdf

  • Costello AB and Osborne JW (2005) Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Evalu 10(7). Available online: http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7

  • Ebenezer J, Osman NK, Devairakkam L (2011) Engaging students in environmental research projects: perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities. J Res Sci Teach 48(1):98–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flick L, Bell R (2000) Preparing tomorrow’s science teachers to use technology: Guidelines for science educators. Contemporary Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ [Online serial] 1 (1). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/science/article1.htm

  • Flick LB, Sadri P, Morrell PD, Wainwright C, Schepige A (2009) Analysis of university teaching in science and mathematics undergraduate courses. School Sci Mathem 109(4):197–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome J, Lederman NG (1995) Biology teachers’ perceptions of subject matter structure and its relationship to classroom practice. J Res Sci Teach 32:301–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorsuch RL (1983) Factor analysis, 2nd edn. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorsuch R (2003) Factor analysis. In: Weiner IB, Freedheim DK, Schinka JA (eds) Handbook of psychology. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 143–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzey SS, Roehrig GH (2009) Teaching science with technology: case studies of science teachers’ development of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ 9(1):25–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston A (2008) Demythologizing or Dehumanizing? A response to settlage and the ideals of open inquiry. J Sci Teacher Educ 19:11–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler M, Mishra P (2005) What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. J Educ Comput Res 32(2):131–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler M, Mishra P (2008) Introducing TPCK. In: AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (ed) Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators. Routledge, New York, pp 3–31

  • Koehler MJ, Mishra P (2009) What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ 9(1):60–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman N (2000) Technocracizing science teaching and learning: a response to Flick and Bell. Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ [Online serial], 1 (1). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/science/article2.htm

  • Lee VR, Thomas JM (2011) Integrating physical activity data technologies into elementary school classrooms. Educ Tech Res Dev 59(6):865–884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leong F, Austin J (2006) The psychology research handbook: a guide for graduate students and research assistants, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Luppicini R (2005) A systems definition of educational technology in Society. Educ Technol Soc 8(3):103–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall JC, Smart J, Horton RM (2010) The design and validation of EQUIP: an instrument to assess inquiry-based instruction. Int J Sci Math Educ 8(2):299–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas W (2004) Keys to teaching the nature of science. Sci Teacher 71(9):24–27

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrory R (2008) Science, technology, and teaching: the topic-specific challenges of TPCK in science. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (ed). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators. Routledge, New York, pp 193–206

  • Mishra P, Koehler MJ (2006) Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108(6):1017–1054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000) Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM, Reston, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2008) Ready, set, science: putting research towork in K-8 science classrooms. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2011) A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

  • National Research Council (NRC) (1996) National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2005) America’s lab report: investigations in high school science. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2007) Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (1998) NSTA position statement: The National Science Education Standards: a vision for the improvement of science and learning. Sci Scope 65(5):32–34

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (2004) NSTA position statement. Sci Inq. Retrieved 22 Dec 2006, from http://nsta.org/positionstatement&psid=43

  • Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan CY, Weiss AR (1999) Student work and teacher practices in science. US Department of Education. Office of Educational Research and Improvement. National Center for Education Statistics. NCES 1999–455

  • Park H, Khan S, Petrina S (2009) ICT in science education: a quasi-experimental study of achievement, attitudes toward science, and career aspirations of Korean middle school students. Int J Sci Educ 31(8):993–1012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins-Gough D (2006/2007) Understanding the scientific enterprise: a conversation with Alan Leshner. Educ Leadersh 64(4):8–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Piburn M, Sawada D, Turley J, Falconer K, Benford R, Bloom I, Judson E (2000). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP): reference manual (ACEPT technical report no. INOO-3). Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers, Tempe, AZ (Eric Document Reproduction Service, ED 447 205)

  • Putnam RT, Borko H (2000) What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educ Res 29(1):4–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawada D, Piburn M, Judson E, Turley J, Falconer K, Benford R, Bloom I (2002) Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: the reformed teaching observation protocol. School Sci Math 102(6):245–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider RM, Krajick J, Blumenfeld P (2005) Enacting reform-based science materials: the range of teacher enactments in reform classrooms. J Res Sci Teach 42(3):283–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86:420–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman LS (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harv Educ Rev 57:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith CL, Wiser M, Anderson CW, Krajcik J (2006) FOCUS ARTICLE: implications of research on children’s learning for standards and assessment: a proposed learning progression for matter and the atomic-molecular theory. Measurement 4(1/2):1–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Soong B, Mercer N (2011) Improving students’ revision of physics concepts through ICT-based co-construction and prescriptive tutoring. Int J Sci Educ 33(8):1055–1078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SPSS (2007) Statistical package for the social sciences for windows, Rel. 16.0.1. 2007. SPSS Inc., Chicago

  • Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2001) Using multivariate statistics. Allyn and Bacon, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Wainwright C, Flick LB, Morrell P (2003) Development of instruments for assessment of instructional practices in standards-based teaching. J Math Sci Collab Explor 6:21–46

    Google Scholar 

  • White BY, Frederiksen JR (1998) Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: making science accessible to all students. Cogn Instr 16(1):3–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl M (2003) Inquiry projects in science teacher education: what can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Sci Educ 87(1):112–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl M, Thompson J, Braaten M (2008) Beyond the scientific method: model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Sci Educ, Published Online. doi:10.1002/sce.20259

  • Wu H (2010) Modelling a complex system: using novice-expert analysis for develo** an effective technology-enhanced learning environment. Int J Sci Educ 32(2):195–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang D, Campbell T (2011) The psychometric evaluation of a three-dimension elementary science attitude survey. J Sci Teacher Educ Elem Sci Educ 22(7):595–612. doi:10.1007/s10972-010-9202-3

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Dartmouth, MA, USA

    Todd Campbell

  2. University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

    Nor Hashidah Abd-Hamid

Authors
  1. Todd Campbell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nor Hashidah Abd-Hamid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd Campbell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Campbell, T., Abd-Hamid, N.H. Technology Use in Science Instruction (TUSI): Aligning the Integration of Technology in Science Instruction in Ways Supportive of Science Education Reform. J Sci Educ Technol 22, 572–588 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9415-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9415-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation