Research Priorlties 'in Educatlonal Technology: A Delphi Study

More documents

Recommendations

Info

opportunity to assign ratings ini Round 3. This round allowed thleml to assignltheir initial perceptioni of the need for the research knowing full well that theywould finalize their ratings based on thei perceptionis and the panel's ratings inthe£ next round. In this way, a group consensus oni research priorities could bereachcd.The Round 3 questionnaire fcatured the panel ratings for the 84 statementsand eight research areas listing the mnean, mtiedian, mode, and stancdard deviation.For this round, paniel memhbers were asked to review the research priorities,con1sider the group response and then re-rate the iteEns, taking the inforniationinto accountt. The eight priority areas were also reviewed arid participantsre-ranked the areas from I to 8, with I beiing the top priority for research ineducationial tcchnology.lFable 2 presents the LDClphi pan1els ranking of the rescarch priority areas foredticational technlology over the next five years. Research itn all aspects of learni£1gandc the effccts of technology on the learning process was assigned the toppriority, with research focused on teacher use of technology and teacher trainitnga,s the second priority.Table 2: Ranking of Research Priority Areas-Round 3 Delphi ResponsesRanlk Category Mean Mode N %I Learning 1.32 ] 22 732 Teachers 2.68 2 1. 373 Models/Strategies 3.63 3 19 334 Assessment 3.89 3 10 335 Current Issues 5.21 5 11 376 Schools 5.57 6 13 '137 Web-Bascd :nvinieoss 6.21 7 11 378 External Influenices 7.47 8 27 90fhe rest of this paper will discuss the research priority catcgories and the specificresearch statements within cach priority area. Table 3 lists the 12 researchstatements inciudcd in the learning category with the Round 3 descriptive statisticalsummary.LearningAlthotughl the nieed( to investigate the imipact of techniology oti studet achicveinienthas beeni a cornmon focus of technology research, the Delphi panel membersstill considered it a high priority for the next five years. Pan1l members commentedon thie establishnient of federal, staite, atnd local standards and accountability issuesas additional reasons wlhy it is so important to examnine student achievement.Ani examinationi of the m-ean ratings of the 12 iesearch statements generateddiscloses a wide range of perceived liced, with1 the panel nienibcrs empphasizingbroader, niiore comprehensive research on learninig and student achievemtient(mcan = 4.47) and less emphasis on investigations tO deterninie the differencenmade by eniploying specific technologies (mean - 2.57). Thiey advocated researchexaniiing how people learn utsinig technology, unlike mariy past researchl150150Winter 2004 ---2005: Voluroe 37.Numbir2
studies that have focused on specific techntiologies and theit imnpact on learninga particular set of skills or content (HEoniey, CuLip, & (C'arrigg, 2000). TheDelphi paniel recomnmended that research efforts be directed toward thie role oftechnology in helping students to becomre better probleml solvers and to accomplishlearning tasks. Coupled with this examination was the need to designl effectivetechnology-enhaniced learning environments to determiine how technologycontributes to student learniing.Panel membitners cited the need to coniduct research that examines the impactof technology in relatison to learnitng principles, brain research. arid multi-r iodallearning. T hey discussed the neect to develop an understanding of how peoplelearn Usinig technology and the impact of technology on the various domnaitns ofleartning (cognitive, affective, and psychmorntoi). The emphasis was on "learning"and riot oni scores onI achievement tests.Table 3. Learning Research Category-Round 3 Delphi ResponsesResearch Need _Meani SD Md-nInvesxdgatc the inpact of technology on sttideritachieverinent 4.47 .69 5Develop anid use learning priniciples to designtechnlology-enhanced learning environn)ents 4 10 .71 4Examine the role of mr£ulti-mnodal learning to providejutst in imne" and only "just as needed" soltitionsto training and in'formational needs 3.85 1.08 4l.,ink knowledge about teachting and learningwith appropriate technologies 3.95 60 4Determrinc the efficacy of learrning content usinglethnologh3y versis more traditional Iieth'ods 3.45 1t .09Exanimne miethods to learn techniology contextually 3.40 .99 3Determnine if the level of technology use relates tothe engagement of activities in the learning process 3030 .57 3Deteinmine the impact of technology on varioutsdomains (cognitive, aiffective, psyc.hornotorl 3.25 .71 3Identify a taxonomy that best represents the issuesand understandings of learner cenereednessand deeper learning 3.25 .78 3Exaiinen methods to make stUdients better at solvingproblemis and accomrplishing tasks usinig I "r(btloimationi ant i'oimleationI'innlogyt 3.25 .98 3Examline how the brain leai ns sod ccse brainscience-based understistinding C£ofhoWv to make effectivetisc of C(T tC) heip improve learning 3.15 .93 3Investigate the cognitive paths of lear2lers in interacntivecourses 3.10 .96 3Determine whvich technologies are making a difference 2.5' 1.3 2Not. J¾reiczpans iere as t o n,e earbreseayvh•sarentrn tire =e nfdl'ie u/¾sn a 5-pointLikenr-tjpe scale (I = N"ees Aleed and 5 = lreiy Zhigh5 Alerdf).Jou rnal of Researcb on Ikehnoiory in Education1 .5
Page 1 and 2: Research Priorlties 'in Educatlonal
Page 3 and 4: early 195ts to predict future defc'
Page 5: Table 1: Demographic Information of
Page 9 and 10: Models/Strategies'fe focus of the t
Page 11 and 12: from the uLse of tcchology, iclud0i
Page 13 and 14: Table 9 con'tRescarcih Nerd Meati S
Page 15 and 16: 1. Learning examirli the relationsh
Page 17: COPYRIGHT INFORMATIONTITLE: Researc

Research Priorlties 'in Educatlonal Technology: A Delphi Study

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?