Vol. 35 No. 1 (2020): Special Issue on Technology and Teacher Education
Special Issue

Coaching Kindergarten Educators through Design-Based Research to Enact Technology-Enhanced Reading Instruction

PDF HTML EPUB
  • Rachel St. Hilaire,
  • Tiffany Gallagher
Rachel St. Hilaire
Brock University
Bio
Tiffany Gallagher
Brock University
Bio

Published 2020-10-30

How to Cite

St. Hilaire, R., & Gallagher , T. L. (2020). Coaching Kindergarten Educators through Design-Based Research to Enact Technology-Enhanced Reading Instruction. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education Revue Internationale Du E-Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 35(1). Retrieved from https://ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1157
Copyright Notice

Abstract

Abstract: The integration of technology into classrooms at all levels of education is ubiquitous, however, some educators are experiencing challenges in implementing technology into their instruction. This study sought to identify ways to support Kindergarten educators (teachers and Early Childhood Educators [ECEs]) to enhance reading instruction with technology-infused lessons. The principal investigator assumed the role of a technology coach and used Design-Based Research (DBR) as both a method and professional development approach. Data collection included field notes, interviews, and surveys with educator participants (n=4). Data were analyzed using an inductive analysis approach; open-ended coding was used to create nodes, and then axial coding was used to create themes to illustrate the data set. The investigators verified and labelled these themes. Findings indicated that support can be provided to Kindergarten educators by enacting iterative cycles of DBR professional learning, anticipating and diagnosing educators’ needs, providing differentiated support, engaging in researcher self-determined problem solving, and liaising with administration. These supports were found to help mitigate barriers that educators faced when implementing technology into their reading programs. The findings provide implications for practice such as using modelling and scaffolding as part of the coaching strategy to implement effective programs of professional learning to support Kindergarten educators in providing instruction through technology-enhanced practices.

Keywords: technology coaching, Kindergarten educators, Design-Based Research (DBR), reading instruction

Résumé: L'intégration de la technologie dans les salles de classe à tous les niveaux d'enseignement est omniprésente, cependant, certains éducateurs ont des difficultés à mettre la technologie en œuvre dans leur enseignement. Cette étude visait à identifier des moyens pour aider les éducateurs de la maternelle (enseignants et éducateurs de la petite enfance [EPE]) à améliorer l'enseignement de la lecture avec des leçons intégrant la technologie. Le chercheur principal a assumé le rôle de coach technologique et a utilisé la recherche basée sur le design (DBR) à la fois comme méthode et comme approche de développement professionnel. La collecte de données comprenait des notes de terrain, des entrevues et des sondages auprès des éducateurs participants (n = 4). Les données ont été analysées en utilisant une approche d'analyse inductive; un codage ouvert a été utilisé pour créer des nœuds, puis un codage axial a été utilisé pour créer des thèmes afin d'illustrer l'ensemble de données. Les enquêteurs ont vérifié et étiqueté ces thèmes. Les résultats indiquent qu’un soutien peut être fourni aux éducateurs de la maternelle en adoptant des cycles itératifs d’apprentissage professionnel DBR, en anticipant et en diagnostiquant les besoins des éducateurs, en fournissant un soutien différencié, en participant à la résolution de problèmes auto-déterminée par les chercheurs et en assurant la liaison avec l’administration. On a constaté que ces soutiens aidaient à atténuer les obstacles auxquels les éducateurs se heurtaient lorsqu'ils implémentaient la technologie dans leurs programmes de lecture. Les résultats ont des implications pour la pratique, comme l'utilisation de la modélisation et de l'échafaudage dans le cadre de la stratégie de coaching pour mettre en œuvre des programmes efficaces d'apprentissage professionnel pour aider les éducateurs de maternelle à dispenser un enseignement grâce à des pratiques améliorées par la technologie.

Mots clés: coaching technologique, éducateurs de maternelle, recherche basée sur la conception, instruction de lecture

PDF HTML EPUB

References

  1. Bates, CC, & Morgan, DN (2018). Seven elements of effective professional development. The Reading Teacher, 71 (5), 623–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1674
  2. Belo, N., McKenney, S., Voogt, J., & Bradley, B. (2016). Teacher knowledge for using technology to foster early literacy: A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 60 , 372–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.053
  3. Birman, BF, Desimone, L., Porter, AC, & Garet, MS (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership, 57 (8), 28–33. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may00/vol57/num08/Designing-Professional-Development-That-Works.aspx
  4. Boschman, F., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2015). Exploring teachers' use of TPACK in design talk: The collaborative design of technology-rich early literacy activities. Computers & Education, 82 , 250–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.010
  5. Caena, F. (2011). Literature review: Quality in teachers' continuing professional development. Education and training 2020 thematic working group 'Professional development of teachers.' European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/education/experts-groups/2011-2013/teacher/teacher-competences_en.pdf
  6. Canadian Index of Wellbeing [CIW]. (2016). How are Canadians really doing? The 2016 CIW national report . Canadian Index of Wellbeing and University of Waterloo.https://uwaterloo.ca/canadian-index-wellbeing/sites/ca.canadian-index-wellbeing/files/uploads/files/c011676-nationalreport-ciw_final-s_0.pdf
  7. Cviko, A., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2012). Teachers enacting a technology-rich curriculum for emergent literacy. Education Technology Research Development, 60 , 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9208-3
  8. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, ME, & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development . Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf
  9. Design Based Research Collective [DBRC]. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry.Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0013189X032001005
  10. Finger, G., & Houguet, B. (2009). Insights into the intrinsic and extrinsic challenges for implementing technology education: case studies of Queensland teachers. International Journal of Technology and Design, 19 , 309–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-007-9044-2
  11. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility . ASCD.
  12. Flewitt, R., Messer, D., & Kucirkova, N. (2015). New directions for early literacy in a digital age: The iPad. Journal of Early Childhood Literary, 15 (3), 289–310.https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798414533560
  13. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8 (4), 597–607. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol8/iss4/6/
  14. Graham, CR (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57 , 1953–1960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.04.010
  15. Grochowski, C. (2016). Interactive technology: What's SAMR got to do with it? [Weblog post]. SmartTech. https://edblog.smarttech.com/2016/06/11471
  16. Hamilton, ER, Rosenberg, JM, & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use. TechTrends, 60 , 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y
  17. Hsu, PS. (2016). Examining current beliefs, practices and barriers about technology integration: A case study. TechTrends, 60 , 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0014-3
  18. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed approaches (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
  19. Kennedy, MM (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800
  20. Lavrakas, PJ (Ed.). (2008). Encyclopedia of survey research methods . Wise.
  21. Learning First Alliance. (2000). Every child reading: A professional development guide . ASCD. https://learningfirst.org/sites/learningfirst/files/assets/Reading_Prof_Develop.pdf
  22. Lynch, M. (2014). Ontario kindergarten teachers' social media discussions about full day kindergarten. McGill Journal of Education, 49 (2), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.7202/1029423ar
  23. McGlynn-Stewart, M., Hobman, L., MacKay, T., Maguire, N., Gouweleeuw, B., Mogyorodi, E., & Ni, V. (2017). Toys or tools? Educators' use of tablet applications to empower young students through open-ended literacy learning. In M. Mills & D. Wake (Eds.), Empowering learners with open-access learning initiatives (pp. 101–123). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2122-8.ch006
  24. McKnight, K., O'Malley, K., Ruzic, R., Horsley, MK, Franey, JJ, & Bassett, K . (2016). Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48 (3), 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1175856
  25. Mishra, P., & Koehler, MJ (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  26. Nikolopoulou, L., & Gialamas, V. (2015). Barriers to the integration of computers in early childhood settings: Teachers' perceptions. Educational and Information Technologies, 20 , 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9281-9
  27. NVivo [Computer software]. (nd) QSR International. https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home
  28. Parette, HP, Quesenberry, AC, & Blum, C. (2010). Missing the boat with technology usage in early childhood settings: A 21st century view of developmentally appropriate practice. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37 , 335–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0352-x
  29. Pearson, PD, & Gallagher, MC (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8 (3), 317–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(83)90019- DanemarkX
  30. Play Learning Lab. (2018). The play continuum. https://www.playlearninglab.ca/resources
  31. Puentedura, RR (2006a). Transformation, technology, and education [Web log post]. http://hippasus.com/resources/tte/
  32. Puentedura, RR (2006b). Transformation, technology, and education [Web log post]. http://hippasus.com/resources/tte/puentedura_tte.pdf
  33. Pyle, A., Poliszczuk, D. & Danniels, E. (2018). The challenges of promoting literacy integration within a play-based learning kindergarten program: Teacher perspectives and implementation. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 32 (2), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2017.1416006
  34. Radano, EA (2018, November). Teacher perceptions of technology-based reading interventions with kindergarten students and the differences between technology-based interventions on student reading growth [Doctoral dissertation]. Wilmington University.https://delaware.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/api/collection/p15323coll5/id/33222/download
  35. Shanley, L., Cary, MS, Clarke, B., Guerreiro, MA, & Thier, M. (2017 ). Instructors' technology experience and iPad delivered intervention implementation: A mixed methods replication study. Education, Technology and Research Development, 65 , 815–830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9488-8
  36. Shulman, LS (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge and growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0013189X015002004
  37. Thomas, DR (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27 (2).https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748
  38. Thompson, AD, & Mishra, P. (2007). Editors' remarks. Breaking news: TPCK becomes TPACK! Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24 (2), 38–64. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10402454.2007.10784583?journalCode=ujdl19
  39. Voogt, J., & McKenney, S. (2017). TPACK in teacher education: Are we preparing teachers to use technology for early literacy? Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26 (1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2016.1174730
  40. Wang, F., & Hannafin, MJ (2005, December). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53 (4), 5–23.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682