The document summarizes research on using technology to teach secondary mathematics. Several studies are discussed that have investigated how incorporating technology impacts student understanding of mathematics. While intuitively technology should help, the research presented has not clearly demonstrated improvements. Reasons why positive results have not been seen are explored, such as whether teachers are properly trained to integrate technology. Overall, more research is still needed to determine if and how technology can be used to enhance mathematics education.

1. Running head: LITERATURE SURVEY
8
Literature Survey (Revised)
Belinda Rector
EDGR 698
Cindy Sutton
November 17, 2014
Technology and the Increase in Student Reception in Secondary
Mathematics
Enrichment through the use of technology is intuitive. How and
when this process is used has not yet been made commonplace
either for teachers or for those who establish curriculum. For
teachers of mathematics, it is a dream that the process of
learning the mechanical aspects of mathematics might be
reduced by allowing students to utilize the results of the
mechanics provided by technology. In its simplest form (i.e. on
phones), technology allows students to add, subtract, multiply,
divide, find percents and several other tedious operations. The
time and attention paid to learning how to do these operations
by hand could and should be replaced with applications of the
operations. And this could and should be replaced with problem
solving which is of interest to the student. Thus the student
could and should be able to reach for the mathematics they need
to solve a problem, thus making mathematics the servant of the
process rather than the queen.
It is of interest to determine whether the inclusion of
technology in the teaching of secondary mathematics actually
increases the student’s reception of the subject. Research will

2. be done to investigate various approaches which have been
made which include technology in the mathematics curriculum.
Literature on this topic was found in the form of research
studies.Review of the Literature
Although there has been surprisingly little research on the topic
of utilizing technology in a regular mathematics curriculum,
several researchers have explored the incorporation of
technology. The results have not demonstrated a positive result
when technology is used in mathematics curriculum. Owing to
this lack of positive results, research was done to determine if
there were other causes which might have altered the expected
results. A study done by Dougherty and Wicklein (1993),
examined the attitudes of various members of the education
community. The premise was that there are educators who do
not wish to add technology to the teaching of mathematics. The
idea of improvement resulting from technology has appeared to
be so basically intuitive that most educators expect technology
to make a large difference in comprehension, application and
retention of mathematics. As mentioned, so far this has not been
the case.
Several studies have approached this topic from different
perspectives. It stands to reason that any teacher who expects to
utilize technology in the teaching of secondary mathematics
should be well trained in the utilization of the technology from
the hardware needed to the software available. A study
(Developing and Validating a Reliable TPACK Instrument for
Secondary Mathematics Preservice Teachers, 2013) which was
done in 2013 approached Preservice teachers and looked at the
specialized knowledge that they would need to effectively
integrate technology into teaching practices of mathematics
(TPACK) (Zelkowski et al, 2013, p. 174). The researchers
attempted to make the survey as valid and reliable as possible in
order to gather data on the preparedness of our future teachers
for using technology to teach mathematics.

3. Going directly to the heart of the matter, a research question
arises from the viewpoint of technology rather than
mathematics. It is of interest to note whether technology
education students are more successful in technology when their
technology education teacher correlates planning and
instruction with their science and mathematics teachers. So
rather than look just at the mathematics classroom, what if
technology can be blended with science and mathematics to see
if there was more “drive” created to understand technology
when the student is able to see the usefulness of it with respect
to science and mathematics. When the results of this research
(Berry & Ritz, 2004, p. 20) did not deliver the expected results,
it was posited that since today’s school curricula uses a
segregated approach to instructional topics when an attempt is
made to integrate subjects, and thus the students were not
“adequately” trained in how to “reassemble the topics into a
coherent body of knowledge” (Wicklein & Schell, 1995, p. 59).
There also might be barriers arising in attitudes from stake
holders as to whether an “effective formal assessment tool”
(Merrill, 2001) exists which can indicate whether students
actually experience an improved learning effect due to the
integrated format. Good synthesizing here! You’ve blended
information from several sources for this topic.
First, it needs to be proven that technology is a viable way to
advance the teaching of the sciences; mathematics in particular.
It can safely be said that large numbers of people assume that
using technology in the sciences is a positive way to hasten the
learning of mathematics allowing students to “dig deeper” in
application. However, there has been very little done in the way
of actually proving this to be true. It is intuitive, but not
proven. One study (Daugherty, Reese & Merrill, 2010) took a
look at the perceptions of the teachers of three subjects,
mathematics, science and technology to try to determine if there
was any difference in being taught by an educator who firmly
believes in the technological approach to learning or by an

4. educator who mistrusts the viability of using technology (at this
time) to teach conceptual mathematics. Through a
questionnaire sent to teachers of mathematics, science and
technology the researchers probed for opinions as to the
reasonableness of using technology to teach mathematics. What
was determined is that those who believe in using technology in
teaching and those who do not have widely different ideas as to
how the process of improving education can be obtained
through technology.
Eventually an investigation was done on standardized tests
scores. This is one of the more important reasons for schools to
be concerned with the integration of technology in the
classroom. The emphasis on improving student achievement in
the core academic areas has led technology educators to try to
demonstrate the links between their courses and the core
academic areas (Berry & Ritz, 2004).
Your Review still needs to be organized with headings. How
can you organize the information you found? For example, if
my paper is on using movement in the middle school to keep
students engaged, my headings might be: Why movement is
important, Ways to add movement, Possible problems with
adding movement.
Do you see? Analysis
In a search to determine why technology has not made an
impact in educational advances in secondary education, various
surveys, quasi-experiments and case studies have been
undertaken to try to pinpoint the reasons for the lack of growth
in student reception of the topics in secondary mathematics.
Some studies studied the incoming new teachers, some studied
the perceptions or expectations of the secondary teachers who
are utilizing technology but not seeing important changes in
student reception and others looked at administration to see if
the problem was in the reluctance of those in control of the
purse strings and curriculum. An additional project studied the

5. results of using a multidisciplinary approach to integrating
mathematics and science with technology education. Finally,
however, in the last study considered a possible connection was
found between improvements in scores on standardized
mathematic testing but not necessarily on the student’s
improved reception of the subject. Connecting physical tasks to
the mental tasks may show increasing promise.
Overall, there is great enthusiasm and diversity for researchers
as they attempt to discover how technology can be used to
redesign how the teaching of mathematics in order to allow
students to explore higher level problems and release them from
the detailed mechanics which mathematics demands at this time.
Please discuss each study’s strengths and weaknesses.
In this Analysis, consider enhancing it by discussing strengths
and weaknesses of each study.
For example:
There seems to be general agreement on x, (see White 2007,
Brown 2000, Black 2008, Green 2005). However, Green (2005)
sees x as a consequence of y, while Black (2008) puts x and y as
…. While Green's work has some limitations in that it …., its
main value lies in …."
Examples taken from University of Queensland: Writing the
literature
review www.uq.edu.au/student-
services/phdwriting/phlink18.htmConclusions
So far, the answer to whether or not technology improves the
reception of mathematics topics in secondary school has not
been definitely shown. None of the questionnaires, surveys,

6. case studies, quasi-experiments investigated here have obtained
the expected results. And yet, the idea is so basic that it simply
must be true. Integrating technology with the teaching of
mathematics must be a lynch pin to improved learning. The
stumbling block preventing the successful approach to
integrating technology with mathematics has not yet been
found. 8-10 pages of actual Literature Review required in final
paper.References
Berry, R. Q. & Ritz, J. M. (2004). Technology education - A
resource for teaching mathematics. The Technology Teacher,
63(8), 20-24. https://www.questia.com/library/p5246/the-
technology-teacher
Daugherty, Jenny L., Reese, George C. and Merrill, Chris
(2010). Trajectories of Mathematics and Technology Education
Pointing to Engineering Design,Journal of Technology Studies,
(Spring 2010), (36)1, 46-52. Retrieved from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JOTS/v36/v36n1/pdf/daughert
y.pdf
Daugherty, Michael & Wicklein (1993). Mathematics, Science
and Technology Teachers’ Perceptions of Technology
Education, Journal of Technology Education, Vol. 4, No. 2,
Spring 1993. Retrieved from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v4n2/jte-
v4n2/daugherty.jte-v4n2.html
Merrill, Chris (2001). Integrated Technology, Mathematics, and
Science Education: A Quasi-Experiment, Journal of Industrial
Teacher Education, (Spring 2001), 38(3). Retrieved from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v38n3/merrill.html
Wicklein, Robert and Schell, John (1995). Case Studies of
Multidisciplinary Approaches to Integrating Mathematics,
Science and Technology Education, Journal of Technology

7. Education, (Spring 1995), Vol. 6, Number 2. Retrieved from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v6n2/pdf/wicklein.pdf
Zelkowski, J., Gleason, J., Cox, D. C., & Bismarck, S. (2013).
Developing and Validating a Reliable TPACK Instrument for
Secondary Mathematics Preservice Teachers. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education (International Society for
Technology in Education), 46(2), 173-206. ISSN: 1539-1523,
Assession Number: 93264917. https://www.iste.org/
Remember that you need 12-15 in the final paper.
Rubric Detail
Content
Top of Form
Name:Week 1 Literature Review
· Grid View (active tab)
· List View
Distinguished
Competent
Basic
Poor
Failing
Literature review analyzes and synthesizes scholarly sources
relevant to the Action Research Question.
Points: 5
Feedback:
Points: 4
Feedback:
Some synthesis evident. More is needed as you add sources.
Analysis is still weak.

8. Points: 3
Feedback:
Points: 2
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
The Literature Review exceeds 7 pages and is showing
significant progress toward the 8-10 page minimum for the final
literature review.
Points: 3
Feedback:
Points: 2
Feedback:
5 pages
Points: 1
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
The Literature Review exceeds 7 sources and is showing
significant progress toward the 12 to 15 source minimum for the
final Literature Review.
Points: 3
Feedback:
Points: 2

9. Feedback:
6 sources
Points: 1
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
Mechanics (spelling, grammar, and punctuation) are flawless,,
Points: 3
Feedback:
Fine
Points: 2
Feedback:
Points: 1
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
The Literature Review is well organized, scholarly, and well-
written.
Points: 3
Feedback:
Points: 2
Feedback:

10. Needs to be organized into topics (headings)
Points: 1
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
The Literature Review includes a reference page. The sources
are cited and referenced using appropriate APA style and
format.
Points: 3
Feedback:
Points: 2
Feedback:
Points: 1
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
Points: 0
Feedback:
Show Descriptions Show Feedback
Literature review analyzes and synthesizes scholarly sources
relevant to the Action Research Question.--
Levels of Achievement:
Distinguished (5 points)
Competent (4 points)

11. Basic (3 points)
Poor (2 points)
Failing (0 points)
Feedback:
The Literature Review exceeds 7 pages and is showing
significant progress toward the 8-10 page minimum for the final
literature review.--
Levels of Achievement:
Distinguished (3 points)
Competent (2 points)
Basic (1 points)
Poor (0 points)
Failing (0 points)
Feedback:
The Literature Review exceeds 7 sources and is showing
significant progress toward the 12 to 15 source minimum for the
final Literature Review.--
Levels of Achievement:
Distinguished (3 points)
Competent (2 points)
Basic (1 points)
Poor (0 points)
Failing (0 points)

12. Feedback:
Mechanics (spelling, grammar, and punctuation) are flawless,,--
Levels of Achievement:
Distinguished (3 points)
Competent (2 points)
Basic (1 points)
Poor (0 points)
Failing (0 points)
Feedback:
The Literature Review is well organized, scholarly, and well-
written.--
Levels of Achievement:
Distinguished (3 points)
Competent (2 points)
Basic (1 points)
Poor (0 points)
Failing (0 points)
Feedback:
The Literature Review includes a reference page. The sources
are cited and referenced using appropriate APA style and
format.--
Levels of Achievement:
Distinguished (3 points)
Competent (2 points)

13. Basic (1 points)
Poor (0 points)
Failing (0 points)
Feedback:
Raw Total: 16.00 (of 20.0)
Feedback
A few revisions have been made. Please see your paper
regarding my comment about Judy B. ??
Revisions still needed with:
Adding sources and synthesizing and analyzing
Oganization
Name:Week 1 Literature Review
Bottom of Form
0.2000000
0.1500000
0.1000000
0.0000000
0.1000000
0.0500000
Exit
0.2500000
5

14. 0.2000000
4
0.1500000
3
0.1000000
2
0.0000000
0
0.2500000
0.0500000
1