Article Critique Form

Article Critique Form

1. Provide the complete article title and author a. The title of the article is “The After Installation: Ubiquitous Computing and High School Science in Three Experienced, High-Technology Schools.”

b. The authors are Brian Drayton, Joni K. Falk, Rena Stroud, Kathryn Hobbs, and James Hammerman.

2. State the intended audience. (What is empirical research and how does it help the classroom?)

The purpose of this study was three fold because of the intended audience. The first intended audience was the administrators at the main school districti and the local schools. The second intended audience was the classroom science teachers. The third audience was the parents of the students using the equipment and parents of future users. Each group of audience needed to received a status or outcome of this research which would give them an idea of whether this use of technology was beneficial after the initial three years of use. Apparently, there had been no research conducted passed after the initial period which is the installation period.

3. What is/are the research question/questions or hypothesis/hypotheses?

Drayton et al focused on three researcher questios. The first question is “In schools with established, ubiquitous computing environments, what technology tools were employed with what frequency, and what was the perceived value of each?” (2010, p. 7). Next, the researchers focused on the second question, “How does the technology add value for science education in these schools?” (2010, p. 8). The final question is “What challenges did teachers encounter in using their technology suite in their teaching of science?” ( 2010, p. 8). The researchers focused on these three questions in an attempt to obtain an actual picture of how effective the technology real is and how effective the technology is in science classes. Also, the researchers wanted to know how this technology usage affected the teachers.

4. Describe the subject (participants) and the procedures (methods) used by the researcher(s)?

Drayton et al. (2010), collected data usings several methods from three different schools ( a rural school, urban school, and private school) over a three year period (p.9). The student population was not the same in each school. The social economic status was different in each school. The type ancnd quantity of technology was different in each school. All data was based off of technology being used in science classes. The students answered questionnaires about the use of technology in their science classes at the end of third year (p.14 ). Administrators and teachers were interviewed about the vision of the school. Teachers had provide a log everytime they used technology to include the type of technolgoy and the preceived benefit of the technology.The teachers had to complete a questionnaire at the start of each school year (p.13). Additionally, the teachers had to submit a teacher’s review twice a month and two-four vignettes describing lesson plans, and at end of the third year attend a focus group to discuss the use of the technology (p.14).

5. What were the conclusions of the researchers? Do you agree or disagree with the conclusions? Support your position.

The findings were ubiquitous for many reasons. First of all, everyone had to value the use of technology in order for it to be successful. The teachers needed more training on the use of the technology and how to integrate it into the lessons (Drayton et al, 2010. p.49). The teachers use the type of technology that they had experience with only (p.49). It does not matter what approach that a school uses if everyone is not committed to making it a success, it will not work. I mean the community, administrators, and teachers must work together to support the product or method (p.48). Also, I support this position because as a teacher, I have control over what happens in my room. If I want to support it I will which I do because I am willing to try anything that will improve student learning. However, I encounter teachers and administrators who have their own agenda and it’s their way or the highway.

6. What suggestions for further research do the authors suggest?

The researchers had several suggestions for further research. First of all, the researchers felt that schools should always have a continuous plan for of new technology tools (Drayton et. al., 2010, p.50). According to Drayton, (2010), schools should provide prefession development regarding the use of the technology for teachers on a continuous basis (p.50). The prefessional development would provide training on different tools of technology which will enable the students to experience the different types of technology to enhance learning. Since it was noted that teachers only used the technology that they were comfortable with using. Finally, the researches felt the schools would benefit by establishing learning communities within each schools and learning communities without walls (p. 50).

7. What other suggestions for future research would you suggest?

There are several suggestions that I would make for future research. First, I would suggest that schools have training regarding the school vision and train everyone on the school vision. Another suggest is to develop a plan so all students have access to the same type of technoloy and keep it up-to-date. Next, the parents, administrators, and teachrs needs to get involved to set a school climate that supports technology. In order for anything to work, everyone has to buy off on it. Maybe, each state needs to establish some method so each classroom can be monitored to determine if technology is being used to support student learning.