Assessing and Addressing: Teachers' Attitudes toward Information Technology in the Gifted Classroom

Abstract

With the increasing complexity and rate of change, self-directed learning and problem-solving become vital, along with interpersonal and team skills. It is evident that new ways of teaching and learning must be devised if our children are to be prepared for the 21st century.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albion

P. R.

Ertmer

P.A.

(2002). Beyond the foundations: The role of vision and belief in teachers' preparation for integration of technology. TechTrends, 46(5), 34–38.

Archambault

F. A.

Jr. Westberg

K. L.

Brown

S. W.

Hallmark

B. W.

Emmons

C. L.

Zhang

(1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers (Research Monograph 93102). Storrs: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.

Ball

D. L.

Cohen

D. K.

(1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice- based theory of professional development. In Darling-Hammond

Sikes

(Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Barron

Kemker

Harmes

Kalaydjian

(2003). Large- scale research study on technology in K-12 schools: Technology integration as it relates to the National Technology Standards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 489–507.

Becker

H. J.

(1994). How exemplary computer-using teachers differ from other teachers: Implications for realizing the potential of computers in schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26, 291–321.

Becker

H. J.

(1999). Internet use by teachers: Conditions of professional use and teacher-directed student use. (Teaching, Learning, and Computing: 1998 National Survey. Report #1). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 429564).

Becker

H. J.

(2001, April). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.

Becker

H. J.

Ravitz

J. L.

Wong

Y. T.

(1999). Teacher and teacher- directed student use of computers and software. Irvine, CA: Center for Research and Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine & University of Minnesota.

10.

Belcastro

(2002). Electronic technology and its use with rural gifted students. Roeper Review, 25, 14–16.

11.

Bishop

W. E.

(1968, January). Successful teachers of the gifted. Exceptional Children, 317–325.

12.

Calhoun

(1994). How to use action research in the self-renewing school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

13.

Chu

J. L.

(2000). Assessment of the integration of technology into the curriculum by middle and high school teachers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(8), 3130A. (UMI No. 9963692).

14.

Clark

K. D.

(2000). Urban middle school teachers' use of instructional technology. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 178–193.

15.

Darling-Hammond

(1996). The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 4–10.

16.

Dede

(Ed.). (1998). Learning with technology: The 1998 ASCD Yearbook. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

17.

Dexter

S. L.

Anderson

R. E.

Becker

H. J.

(1999). Teachers' views of computers as catalysts for changes in their teaching practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31, 221–238.

18.

Dirksen

Tharp

(2000). Goals 2000: Initial evaluation. Moving beyond the crossroads: Teachers as agents for change. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 444453).

19.

Dove

Zitkovitch

(2003). Technology driven group investigations for gifted elementary students. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 223–41.

20.

Ertmer

P A

Gopalakrishnan

Ross

E. M.

(2001). Technology- using teachers: Comparing perceptions of exemplary technology use to best practice [Electronic version]. Journal of Research on Technology Education, 33(5).

21.

Grabe

(1996). Integrating technology for meaningful learning. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

22.

Grant

C. M.

(1996). Professional development in a technological age: New definitions, old challenges, new resources. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from ra.terc.edu/publications/TERC_pubs/tech-infusion/prof_dev/prof_dev_frame.html.

23.

Hart

H. M.

Allensworth

Lauen

D. L.

Gladden

R. M.

(2002). Educational technology: Availability and use in Chicago's public schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.

24.

Hirumi

(2002). Student-centered, technology-rich learning environments (SCenTRLE): Operationalizing constructivist approaches to teaching and learning. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 497–537.

25.

Hord

(1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from www.sedl.org/pubs/change34/plc-cha34.pdf.

26.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (1998a). Technology foundation standards for all students. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from cnets.iste.org/students/s_stands.html.

27.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (1998b). Educational technology standards and performance indicators for all teachers. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from cnets.iste.org/teach-ers/t_stands.html.

28.

Joyce

Showers

(1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40(1), 4–10.

29.

Landrum

M. S.

Callahan

C. M.

Shaklee

B. D.

(2001). Aiming for excellence: Annotations to the NAGC pre-K—grade 12 gifted program standards. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

30.

Louis

K. S.

Kruse

S. D.

(1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

31.

McLaughlin

M. W.

Talbert

J. E.

(1993). Contexts that matter for teaching and learning. Stanford, CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary School Teaching, Stanford University.

32.

No Child Left Behind Act, 20 U.S.C. §6301 (2001).

33.

North Central Regional Education Laboratory (NCREL). (1997). Learning with technology profile tool. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from www.ncrtec.org/capacity/profile/profile.htm.

34.

Pajares

M. F.

(1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.

35.

Palombo

(2003). A network that puts the net to work. Journal of Staff Development, 24, 24–28.

36.

Phillips

(2003). Powerful learning: Creating learning communities in urban school reform. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18, 240–258.

37.

President's Panel on Educational Technology. (1997). Report to the President on the use of technology to strengthen K—12 education in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

38.

Ravitz

Wong

Becker

(1999). Teaching, learning and computing: 1998: Report to participants. Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations. Retrieved May 11, 2005 from www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/special_report/index.htm.

39.

Rokeach

(1972). Beliefs, attitudes, and values. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

40.

Russel

Bebell

O'Dwyer

O'Connor

(2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 297–310.

41.

Saye

J. W.

(1998). Technology in the classroom: The role of dispositions in teacher gatekeeping. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 13, 210–234.

42.

Shaunessy

(2003). Attitudes of teachers of the intellectually gifted in Mississippi toward information technology. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(3), 860. (UMI No. 3084216).

43.

Siegle

(2005). Using media & technology with gifted learners. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

44.

Smerdon

Cronen

Lanahan

Anderson

Ianotti

Angeles

(2000). Teacher's tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers' use of technology (NCES 2000–102). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

45.

Solmon

L. C.

Wiederhorn

J. A.

(2000). Progress of technology in the schools: 1999: Report on 27 states. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from www.mff.org/pubs/Progress_27states.pdf.

46.

South Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium (SCRTEC). (2004). Instrument library. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from insight.southcentralrtec.org.

47.

Spillane

J. P.

(2000). District leaders' perceptions of teacher learning: CPRE occasional paper. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.

48.

State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA). (2003). SETDA National Leadership Institute toolkit. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from ali.apple.com/ali_media/Users/1000040/files/others/eet.pdf.

49.

Texas Center for Educational Technology (TCET). (2003). Publications. Retrieved May 11, 2005, from www.tcet.unt.edu/publications.

50.

Waits

Demana

(1996). A computer for all students—revisited. Mathematics Teacher, 89, 712–714.

51.

Wenglinsky

(1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 425191).

52.

Zhao

Frank

K. A.

(2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 807–840.