Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Sistekchandlerdefenserfinal

567 views

Published on

Dissertation Defense 2007, A Mixed Methods Study on CBAM and the Adoption of Thin Client Computers by Adolescents

Published in: Education
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Sistekchandlerdefenserfinal

  1. 1. A Mixed Methods Study on CBAM and the Adoption of Thin Client Computers by Adolescents <ul><ul><li>Doctoral Defense for Cynthia Sistek-Chandler January 22, 2007 University of San Diego & </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>San Diego State University Joint Doctoral Program, Cohort 1 </li></ul></ul>
  2. 2. Statement of Purpose <ul><li>Our youth are important stakeholders in the adoption of innovation; in particular, for this study, it was critically important to address how adolescents adapted to changes imposed by implementing technology. While thousands of educators have contributed to the concerns-based, adoption literature, what was notably absent was empirical and analytical data that reflects how adolescents have adopted and adapted to these innovations. </li></ul>
  3. 3. Overview <ul><li>This dissertation study applied a change instrument, grounded in Concerns Based Adoption Management (CBAM) to investigate perceptions of 45 middle school students who used thin client, portable computers in a one-to-one program at home and at school for three years. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Research Questions <ul><li>Q. 1 During the first year of the adoption, what stages of concern were evident at the beginning and at the end of the year? </li></ul><ul><li>Q. 2 To what extent can variation in these stages of concern be explained by select demographic measures (gender, race/ethnicity, and prior experience with computers)? </li></ul><ul><li>Q. 3 Based on the qualitative interviews, how do select students describe their adoption of this innovation? </li></ul>
  5. 5. Background: Theory and the Instrumentation CBAM and CFSoCQ <ul><li>Hall & Hord (1991) designed a change behavior schema based on seven levels of change ( see handout ). </li></ul><ul><li>The Change Facilitator Stages of Concern Questionnaire (CFSoCQ) was modified for this research to measure stages of change in a population other than adults or facilitators. </li></ul><ul><li>Modification of instrument for population. </li></ul>
  6. 6. Modifications <ul><li>Pilot </li></ul><ul><li>Piloted the modified CFSoCQ with 5 th and 6 th graders at a private school </li></ul><ul><li>Tested instrument for readability with this pilot group </li></ul><ul><li>With Population in Study </li></ul><ul><li>Read all 35 questions to the students </li></ul><ul><li>Clarified the meaning of the word “Concern” </li></ul><ul><li>Gave example of a Likert scale rating based on the popularity of a local radio station. </li></ul><ul><li>Importance of the scale from 0 to 7 </li></ul>
  7. 7. Demographics of Students Other 33% 11% .02% 44% 11% Percent 15 5 1 20 5 Population 23.7% 211 White (non-Hispanic) 3.4% 30 Filipino 3.3% 29 Asian 1.6% 14 Pacific Islander 0.7% 6 Native American 38.1% 339 Hispanic or Latino 29.0% 260 African American Percent School Racial and Ethnic
  8. 8. Review of Literature <ul><li>Focused on Five Major Areas </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Review of Concerns Based Adoption Management theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adoption of innovation by adults and studies involving teachers/educators and the effects on students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Case studies of best practices of laptop initiatives, specifically 1:1 programs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Diffusion of Innovation Theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social psychology of adolescents (Added 1/07)* </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Design and Methodology <ul><li>Data Collection </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Quantitative) CFSoCQ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Qualitative) Interviews </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Analysis </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Quantitative) Stages and Pathways </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Qualitative) Data Analysis and coding of interviews with all parties </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Quantitative Analysis Q. 1 During the first year of the adoption, what stages of concern were evident at the beginning and at the end of the year? <ul><li>Pre and Posttest values </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>CF Stages of Concern Identification </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Raw Score Percentile Conversion </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>High Stage Scores </li></ul><ul><li>Second High Stage Scores </li></ul><ul><li>Analysis of Pairs </li></ul>
  11. 11. Distribution of the Population
  12. 12. Findings for Research Q. 1 <ul><li>Evidence of stages of change and movement through the stages </li></ul><ul><li>Notable Absence of High Stage Scores for </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stage 3 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stage 4 </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Pretest
  14. 14. Posttest
  15. 15. Pre-Posttest Comparison
  16. 16. Results
  17. 17. Research Q. 2 To what extent can variation in these stages of concern be explained by select demographic measures (gender, race/ethnicity, GPA, free and reduced lunch)? <ul><li>Stepwise linear regression analysis of data </li></ul><ul><li>Importance of gender, ethnicity, age, free and reduced lunch, GPA </li></ul>
  18. 18. Two Significant Findings <ul><li>Finding 1: Posttest </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Significance of free and reduced lunch variable </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>t = -2.97 ( p = .01) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discussion: Poverty levels slower progression through the stages of change </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Finding 2: Second High Stage Scores </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Significance of the gender variable (males) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>t = 2.03 ( p = .05) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discussion: Adolescent males gained close to two stages of change more than females </li></ul></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Q. 3 Based on the qualitative interviews, how do select students describe their adoption of this innovation? <ul><li>Formal interviews conducted in Year 2 and midway through Year 3 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Students, parents, teachers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>8 Case Studies (6 females and 2 males) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CFSoCQ’s analyzed for 8 students </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Paired analysis and pathway analysis </li></ul>
  20. 20. 3 Distinct Pathways <ul><li>Pathway 1 (P1) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Upward progression </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consistent with the literature </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Pathway 2 (P2) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inconsistent with the literature </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Pathway 3 (P3) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reverse pathway </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inconsistent with the literature </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Pathway 1 Example Female, Wendy Typical Progression
  22. 22. Pathway 2 Example
  23. 23. Proportional Representation to Case Study Total Population: 32 females, 13 males Case Study: 6 females, 8 males 1-M 2-F 7-M 6-F Gender 2-F 1-M 3-M 17-F Gender 2-F 3-M 9-F Gender 2 (25%) 3 (37.5%) 3 (37.5%) Case Study n = 8 12 (7%) 20 (44%) 13 (9%) Population N = 45 P3 P2 P 1
  24. 24. Findings, cont. <ul><ul><li>Commonly held perceptions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Connection with writing and handwriting </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Connection to GPA and grades </li></ul></ul></ul>
  25. 25. Perceptions about Grades <ul><li>Mariah </li></ul><ul><li>In sixth grade, the tablet really improved my grades, fourth quarter. In seventh grade, my grades are almost all straight A’s. In eighth grade, I have all A’s. </li></ul><ul><li>Teresa </li></ul><ul><li>The tablet has been good for me [my mom thinks it helped my grades]. </li></ul>
  26. 26. GPA’s 2.70 2.54 Michael 2.98 2.59 Justin 3.14 3.00 Teresa 3.37 3.01 Mariah 3.11 2.55 Ariel 3.77 3.23 Michelle 3.87 3.23 Wendy 3.98 3.60 Shelly GPA 7th GPA 6th Student
  27. 27. Four themes from literature <ul><li>Efficacy of the 1:1 program </li></ul><ul><li>Efficacy of the innovation on academics and writing </li></ul><ul><li>Efficacy of the environment (influence of teacher, parents, home, and peers) </li></ul><ul><li>The importance of technology integration in the curriculum </li></ul>
  28. 28. Themes from the Literature <ul><li>Continued efficacy of the 1:1 program </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Results from another evaluation study (Rockman, et al, 1999) indicated that students with laptops: (a) spent more time involved in collaborative work </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(b) participated in more project-based instruction, (c) produced writing of higher quality and greater length </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(d) gained increased access to information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(e) improved research analysis skills, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(f) spent more time doing homework on computers. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Effects on writing and academics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Jeroski (2005, 2003) in the Wireless Writing Project, reported student attitudes, perceptions, motivation, and work habits all improved as a result of their 1:1 laptop program. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Writing reflected depth and breadth, and the frequency of the assignments and homework increased. </li></ul></ul>
  29. 29. Limitations of the Study <ul><li>Instrument appropriateness </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Likert Scale Ratings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self reports and reliability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Frequency of the administration of the instrument </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Small population N = 45 </li></ul><ul><li>Case studies are limited more interviews, more frequently </li></ul>
  30. 30. Policy Implications <ul><li>One-to-One Initiatives </li></ul>
  31. 31. Implications for Future Research <ul><li>Three recommendations: </li></ul><ul><li>(1) expand the study to include a larger sample </li></ul><ul><li>(2) explore the need to use an alternate instrument or further modified CFSoCQ </li></ul><ul><li>(3) collect additional qualitative data to support and verify the quantitative data </li></ul>
  32. 32. Future Research <ul><li>It is my hope that the results of this study will continue to influence future research efforts with middle and high school students to develop a framework for understanding the change process for the adoption of innovation by adolescents in school, at home, and in the community. </li></ul>
  33. 33. Questions? Thank you for your time!

×