This study examined whether students' 1) motivation, 2) anxiety, and 3) classroom learning environment in mathematics significantly differed according to the degree of implementation of technology in the mathematics classroom. The participants were 1955 sixth-grade and 1940 eighth-grade students who were randomly chosen from a multi-ethnic school district in the south central region of the United States. The sixth-grade results indicate that students in classes where technology was slightly used had significantly higher Involvement, Satisfaction, and Achievement Motivation than students in classes where technology was moderately or infrequently used. The eighth-grade results revealed that students in classes where technology was slightly used had significantly higher Affiliation, Parent Involvement, and Achievement Motivation, but students in classes where technology was moderately used had significantly higher Satisfaction and significantly lower Mathematics Anxiety.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrightG. W.WaxmanH. C., and WilliamsS. E., Multiple Perspectives on the Impact of Calculators on the Mathematics Curriculum, in Impact of Calculators on Mathematics Instruction, BrightG. W.WaxmanH. C., and WilliamsS. E. (eds.), University Press of America, Lanham, Maryland, pp. 1–6, 1994.
2.
OliveJ., Technology and School Mathematics, International Journal of Educational Research, 17, pp. 503–516, 1992.
3.
HooperS. and RieberL. P., Teaching, Instruction, and Technology, in Contemporary Issues in Curriculum, OrnsteinA. C. and BeharL. S. (eds.), Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, Massachusetts, pp. 251–264, 1995.
4.
RockmanS., Telecommunications and Restructuring: Supporting Change or Creating It, in Educational Policy and Telecommunications Technologies, SheekeyA. D. (ed.), U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C., pp. 24–35, 1991.
5.
SalomonG., Effects with and of Computers and the Study of Computer-Based Learning Environments, in Computer-Based Learning Environments and Problem Solving, De CorteE.LinnM. C.MandlH. and VerschaffelL. (eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, pp. 249–263, 1992.
6.
SalomonG., The Changing Role of the Teacher: From Information Transmitter to Orchestrator of Learning, in Effective and Responsible Teaching, OserF. K.DickA., and PatryJ. L. (eds.), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 35–49, 1992.
7.
SheingoldK., Restructuring for Learning with Technology: The Potential for Synergy, in Restructuring for Learning with Technology, SheingoldK. and TuckerM. S. (eds.), Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street College of Education, New York, pp. 9–27, 1990.
8.
KnightS. L. and WaxmanH. C., Students' Cognition and Classroom Instruction, in Effective Teaching: Current Research, WaxmanH. C. and WalbergH. J. (eds.), McCutchan, Berkeley, California, pp. 239–255, 1991.
9.
WinneP. H., Steps toward Promoting Cognitive Achievements, The Elementary School Journal, 85, pp. 673–693, 1985.
10.
WittrockM., Students' Thought Processes, in Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd Edition), WittrockM. (ed.), Macmillan, New York, pp. 297–314, 1986.
11.
SchunkD. H., Theory and Research on Student Perceptions in the Classroom, in Student Perceptions in the Classroom, SchunkD. H. and MeeceJ. L. (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 3–23, 1992.
12.
WeinsteinR. S., Perceptions of Classroom Processes and Student Motivation: Children's Views of Self-Fulfilling Prophecies, in Research on Motivation in Education: Goals and Cognitions, Vol. 3, AmesC. and AmesR. (eds.), Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 187–221, 1989.
13.
AndersonL. W., The Classroom Environment Study: Teaching for Learning, Comparative Education Review, 31, pp. 69–87, 1987.
14.
WaxmanH. C., Investigating Classroom and School Learning Environments: A Review of Recent Research and Developments in the Field, Journal of Classroom Interaction, 26: 2, pp. 1–4, 1991.
FraserB. J., Two Decades of Classroom Environment Research, in Educational Environments: Evaluation, Antecedents and Consequences, FraserB. J. and WalbergH. J. (eds.), Pergamon, Oxford, England, pp. 3–27, 1991.
17.
FraserB. J.WalbergH. J.WelchW. W., and HattieJ. A., Syntheses of Educational Productivity Research, International Journal of Educational Research, 11, pp. 145–252, 1987.
18.
FraserB. J., Determinants of Classroom Psychosocial Environments: A Review, Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 1, pp. 5–19, 1986.
19.
FraserB. J. and WubbelsT., Classroom Learning Environments, in Improving Science Education, FraserB. J. and WalbergH. J. (eds.), National Society for the Study of Education, Chicago, pp. 117–144, 1995.
20.
ChengY. C., Classroom Environment and Student Affective Performance: An Effective Profile, Journal of Experimental Education, 62, pp. 221–239, 1994.
21.
KnightS. L. and WaxmanH. C., Investigating the Effects of the Classroom Learning Environment on Students' Motivation in Social Studies, Journal of Social Studies Research, 14, pp. 1–12, 1990.
22.
NathJ. L.WilliamsS. E., and WaxmanH. C., The Effects of Psychosocial Variables on Middle School Students' Problem-Solving Achievement in Mathematics, in Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2, KirshnerD. (ed.), Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, pp. 136–142, 1994.
23.
UgurogluM. E.SchillerD. P., and WalbergH. J., A Multidimensional Motivational Instrument, Psychology in the Schools, 18, pp. 279–285, 1981.
24.
WilliamsS. E.NathJ. L., and WaxmanH. C., Middle School Students' Calculator Confidence, Mathematics Anxiety, and Stages of Problem-Solving Achievement, in Technology and Teacher Education AnnualWillisJ.RobinB., and WillisD. A. (eds.), Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Charlottesville, Virginia, pp. 572–576, 1994.
25.
FraserB. J. and TehG. P. L., Effect Sizes Associated with Micro-Prolog-Based Computer-Assisted Learning, Computers in Education, 23, pp. 187–196, 1994.
26.
MacGregorK. S., Research Issues in Computer-Assisted Learning Environments, in The Study of Learning Environments, Vol. 1, FraserB. J. (ed.), Assessment Research, Salem, Oregon, pp. 63–68, 1986.
27.
UgurogluM. E. and WalbergH. J., Predicting Achievement and Motivation, Journal of Research and Development in Education, 19, pp. 1–12, 1986.
28.
FraserB. J., Twenty Years of Classroom Climate Work: Progress and Prospect, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21, pp. 307–325, 1989.
29.
PintrichP.SmithD., and McKeachieW., A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1989.
30.
WaxmanH. C.WangM. C.LindvallC. M., and AndersonK. A., Classroom Observation Schedule Technical Manual, University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1983.
31.
HembreeR., The Nature, Effects, and Relief of Mathematics Anxiety, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21: 1, pp. 33–46, 1990.
32.
LevineG., Closing the Gender Gap: Focus on Mathematics Anxiety, Contemporary Education, 67: 1, pp. 42–45, 1995.
33.
BraunL., School Dropouts, Economics, and Technology, The Computing Teacher, 18: 6, pp. 24–25, 1991.
34.
MoerschC., Levels of Technology Implementation (LoTi): A Framework for Measuring Classroom Technology Use, Learning and Leading with Technology, 23: 3, pp. 40–42, 1995.
35.
HadleyM. and SheingoldK., Commonalities and Distinctive Patterns in Teachers' Integration of Computers, American Journal of Education, 101, pp. 261–315, 1993.
36.
WaxmanH. C. and BrightG. W., Research Methods and Paradigms in Technology and Teacher Education, in Approaches to Research in Teacher Education and Technology, WaxmanH. C. and BrightG. W. (eds.), Association for the Advancement of Computers and Education, Charlottesville, Virginia, pp. 1–9, 1993.
