Despite
wide investments in technology use in education, many teachers are not able to
adopt technology for teaching and learning tasks and the gap between technology
presence in schools and its effective use is too wide (Jacobsen, 2001). Many
teachers believe that technology integration is a difficult, time-consuming and
resource-intensive endeavor and is more trouble than it is worth (Sheingold
& Hadley, 1990). The under-utilization of technology is probably a result
of a lack of vision of technology's potential for improving teaching and
learning (Office of Technology Assessment, 1995) and the difficulty to cross
the bridge between technology’s capabilities and curriculum requirements
(SERVE, 1996).
Dexter,
Anderson and Becker (1999) indicate that the effectiveness of technology integration
into education is largely dependent upon its ability to engage students into
learning. Trilling and Hood (1999) believe that the key in using educational
technology is to utilise meaningful activities that may engage students to construct
their knowledge in different ways, not available before the technology was
introduced. Studies have shown that learner engagement is paramount to learning
success (Herrington, Oliver & Reeves, 2003). Lim, Nonis, & Hedberg
(2006) reviewed the literature and found that there is a myriad of definitions
for the term engagement. They concluded that 'what is apparent about the
definitions of engagement is that they entail some kind of mindfulness,
intrinsic motivation, cognitive effort, and attention' (p.213). However, there
are different levels of engagement that one can attain.
Meaningful
technology integration is defined as curricula, utilising authentic tasks that
intentionally and actively help learners to construct their own meanings from
thinking about experiences and allows for more interdisciplinary project-based
instruction (Jonassen, Peck & Wilson, 1999). Integration is defined not by
the amount or type of technology used, but by how and why it is used (Earle,
2002).
Meaningful
integration of technology is achieved when students are able to select
technology tools to help them obtain information in a timely manner, analyze
and synthesise the information and present it professionally (Harris, 2005). However,
harnessing the power of technology integration requires not only a new or
advanced technology, but also a systematic way of utilising the technology to improve
student learning (Schofield, 1995).
Research
indicates that In order to achieve meaningful technology integration, learning
must be designed from a constructivist approach that encourages students to
learn in a social context and help them to develop an ability to readily create
new knowledge, solve new problems and employ creativity and critical thinking
(Griest, 1996; Hoffman, 1997; Mergendollar, 1997; Richards, 1998). Spivey
(1997) indicated that constructivists view students as constructive agents and
view knowledge as built instead of passively received by students whose ways of
knowing and understanding influence what is known and understood.
In
addition, the interaction between students, the flow of ideas and loud thinking
encourage students to foster active learning, in which users discover and
address gaps in their understanding when explaining concepts to others (Kafai,
Ching & Marshall, 1997; Tyner, 1998).
Constructivist
strategies include collaborative and cooperative learning methods, engaging in
critical and reflective thinking and evaluation through electronic portfolios
(Nanjappa & Grant, 2003). Jonassen and Carr (2000) believe that in order to
help students to construct their knowledge, they should be actively involved in
learning with the help of ICT tools. In addition, Wheatley (1991) argued that
because a student will construct his/her own meaning based on his/her
interpretation, technology can become a vital educational tool depending on the
way it is used in learning. Strommen and Lincoln (1992) believe that it is not
what technology is used, but how the technology is used to be relevant to a constructivist
classroom.
For
example, initial computer’s role in education has been largely viewed through
Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI), which is generally used for low-end tasks
or providing a richer and more exciting learning environment, such as drill and
practice (Office of Technology Assessment, 1995; Duffy & Cunningham, 1996;
Roe, Stoodt & Burns, 1998). However, teachers can use computers, as tools
for accessing information, interpreting and organizing their personal knowledge
and producing and representing what they know to others, to engage students
more and result in more meaningful and transferable knowledge (Jonassen et al.,
1993).
Lim
and Tay (2004) classified ICT tools used in the
classroom to improve student learning into four types: 1) informative tools; 2)
situating tools; 3) communicative tools; and 4) constructive tools. Informative
tools are applications that that store and provide vast amount of information
in various formats (e.g., databases, encyclopaedias and web resources). Situating
tools are systems that situate students in an environment where they may
experience the context (e.g., simulations and games). Communicative tools are
systems that facilitate communication between the student and others (e.g.
e-mail and discussion boards).
Constructive
tools are general-purpose ICT tools that can be used for manipulating
information, constructing student's own knowledge or produce a certain tangible
product for a given instructional purpose. PowerPoint and Word, for example, are
found the most frequently used constructive tools by students for their
presentations and special curriculum-based projects (Lim and Tay 2004). Multimedia
authoring and presenting tools, in particular, like PowerPoint, Illustrator, MultiMedia
Builder, HyperStudio, MovieMaker and iMovies proved to be a good constructive tools
to learn through production, collaboration and project management.