1. Jackie Nelson

2.  Technology is a necessity
 Not all teachers are comfortable
 Young students do not have basic computer
skills yet
 Time!

3.  It has been done!
 More and more each year as the technology
is ever-changing

4. Do the benefits of using technology
outweigh the challenges?

5.  10 research studies that looked at technology
in terms of:
 Student achievement
 Student engagement, motivation and attitude
 Student creativity
 Teacher usage
5 articles that addressed
 Growing trends in technology in education
 The ever-changing technology
 Accessibility to technology

6.  Handheld devices
 Desktop and laptop computers
 Classroom and personal computers
 Interactive white boards
 Tablets
 The internet and specific programs

7.  When technology is used in a meaningful
way…
 Increase in student academic achievement
 Increase in student motivation and attitude
 Increase in student engagement
 Increase in student creativity
 Opportunities for collaboration and
communication
 Opportunities to acquire deeper knowledge on
specific subject matter

8.  Simply integrating technology is not enough
 Must be done in a meaningful way
 Nocorrelation found between a students’
technology literacy and their academic
achievement
 This is encouraging!
 Students showed little frustration
 Even when faced with technical difficulties!

9.  Teachers were not all fully committed
 Academic achievement suffered
What can we do about this?

10.  Weneed to embrace the technological
changes and the positive impact they can
have on student success
 Teachers need support
 Gain confidence and comfort in technology
 Develop meaningful ways to integrate
technology into the curriculum

11. Connelly, G. (2012, Jan/Feb). There's no time like the future. Principal, 48.
Cooper, S. (2004, September). Computerized practice tests boost student achievement. T.H.E.
Journal, 58-59.
Couse, L. J., & Chen, D. W. (2010). A tablet computer for young children? Exploring its viability for
early childhood education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(1), 75-98.
House, J. D. (2007). Relationships between computer use and reading achievement of elementary-
school students: Results from the PIRLS 2001 assessment. International Journal of Instructional
Media, 34(4), 449-456.
Jaieson-Proctor, R., & Burnett, P. C. (2002). Elementary students, creativity, and technology:
Investigation of an intervention designed to enhance personal creativity. Computers in the
Schools, 19(1/2), 33-48.
Judson, E. (2010). Improving technology literacy: Does it open doors to traditional content?. Education
Tech Research Dev, 58, 271-284.
Kershner, R., Mercer, N., Warwick, P., & Staarman, J. E. (2010). Can the interactive whiteboard
support young children’s collaborative communication and thinking in classroom science
activities?. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 359-383.

12. Kleemans, T., Segers, E., Droop, M., & Wentink, H. (2011). Webquests in special primary education:
Learning in a web-based environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(5), 801-810.
Laffey, J. M., Espinosa, L., Moore, J., & Lodree, A. (2003). Supporting learning and behavior of at-risk
young children: Computers in urban education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
35(4), 423-440.
Miller, S. & Simkins, M. (2002, Nov/Dec). Improved access to learning. Leadership, 22-24.
Ray, R. (2011, March/April). Extreme makeover: Reading edition. Principal, 14-17.
Revenaugh, M. (2006, January). K-8 virtual schools: A glimpse in the future. Educational Leadership,
60-64.
Rosen, Y., & Beck-Hill, D. (2012). Intertwining digital content and a one-to-one laptop environment in
teaching and learning: Lessons from the time to know program. Journal of Research on Technology
in Education, 44(3), 225-241.
Wu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2010). Examining potentialities of handheld technology in students' academic
attainments. Educational Media International, 47(1), 57-67.
Ysseldyke, J., & Bolt, J. M. (2007). Effect of technology-enhanced continuous progress monitoring on
math achievement. School Psychology Review, 36(3), 453-467.