Proposal final

1
I. Introduction
The students of today are surrounded by technology, where access to a vast collection
of information that is only a fingertip away (Egbert, 2009). Many in the field of pedagogy
state that technology integration is helpful, meaningful, and necessary for a school to
function successfully. However, many teachers are reluctant to make the change, and many
students are not motivated to try. In 2013, a survey was given to the Chicago Public Schools
by Ehrlich, Sporte, Sebring, & the Consortium on Chicago Schools (2013). It was found
that 92% of students had some form of technology and internet access in their home, but
fewer than half of the students used that technology for work related to school.
Technology is continually changing and empirical studies of the characteristics of
technology do not provide answers that remain meaningful for very long. Occasionally a
new technology appears which promises to change our lives for the better. It either
improves our performance by working more simply and at a faster rate, or it creates
possibilities and options that did not previously exist. They also create different
possibilities for interacting with the world by applying these calculations to information
processing, and thus, form a new arena for social interaction. Technologies like the Internet
continue the social evolution of communications and information that began with speech,
writing and printing (for an analysis of these influences see Ong, 1982).
Technologies may affect teacher’s productive learning tool to build or to improve
the student participation. For the most part, decisions to adopt these technologies for
teaching are justified on technical grounds. Yet, despite a seemingly straightforward
technical criterion of using the most appropriate tool for the job, there is little research that
unambiguously shows whether introducing technology into teaching actually improves the

2
quality of student learning (for a review of the “no significant difference phenomenon” see
Russell, 1999).
Technology is ubiquitous in the real world and educational settings lag behind the
needs and expectations of the students. It is through this lens that the initial diagnosis of
the status of NECS and its technology implementation occurred in 2012.
Meanwhile, evaluative reports continue to criticize technology for failing to live up
to its promise of providing greater learning opportunities for students. Taking the example
of computer-aided learning, the best case of improvement he was able to locate was an
annual two per cent increase in student performance over the fifteen years of the study
(Landauer, 1995, p. 201).
Furthermore, the outcomes that technologies are able to achieve for learning are
usually related to lower-order educational goals, such as the memorization of information.
In the case of personal computers, Cuban (2001, p. 138) estimated that fewer than
five per cent of teachers used computers in their teaching 3 on a weekly basis and less than
twenty-five per cent on a monthly basis, despite what Cuban calls an “over-abundance” of
computer and information technology (p. 103).
1.1 Background of the study

3
This study focuses on the technologies used by the academic context. Specially, for
the teacher’s to the students to prevent from sleeping during class. As we can see,
technologies increases rapidly so that the learning process also should run parallel with the
increase of the technology. Some educators see games as a useful and perhaps even
necessary learning environment suitable for learners of all ages. Regarding the role in
teaching process.
The use of educational technology in schools as a means to improve student
learning has received extensive attention over the past two decades. With the advent of the
internet and a variety of software and hardware applications, school districts have
predominantly focused on the acquisition of hardware and computer network infrastructure
in the pursuit of educational technology goals (Anderson & Becker, 2001).
Access and availability to computer technologies has significantly increased in
schools throughout the country, questions persist as to the actual impact these technologies
are having in the planning and delivery of instruction as well as the perceived benefits to
the learning process. The study described in this document was designed to discover
research-based truths related to educational technology and its use in schools. Such
discovery will serve to assist in understanding the impact technology is having on the way
the inhabitants of school classrooms interact with one another as they go about the business
of “schooling”.
The impact of educational technology has been met with much skepticism in recent
years due to a lack of evidence that it has been effective in improving student learning and
its perceived excessive cost (Cuban, 2001). The extensive expenditures on technology in
schools have been accompanied by claims that technology’s impact on education is

4
significant (Software & Information Industry Association, 2000). Bloom (1996) stated that
educators should use much care and skepticism as they travel along the “information super-
toll road”.
Bloom also perceived comparisons to the current push for technology with other
reforms of the past that have failed or had minimal impact, e.g. language labs and filmstrip
viewers. Many researchers have attempted to respond to the call for additional research in
proving the value of educational technology. For example, the utilization of computer
technology in schools can be perceived along a continuum of technology use.
More recent initiatives in schools have provided laptop or handheld computers for
each and every student, with some schools allowing students to check out computers for
use at home as well as at school. Rockman (2003) claimed that such programs have
required teachers to significantly restructure how they teach, allowing a students as
teacher’s model to develop as “many students thrive in an environment where they have
skills and knowledge to share and to trade” (p. 26).Teacher knowledge and training is a
critical component in the successful integration of technology in today’s classrooms. The
Software and Information Industry Association (2000) found that educators are an essential
element in the effectiveness of technology.Such effectiveness depends upon a match
between learner characteristics and educators’ teaching goals and technology
implementation decisions.
Coley et al. (1997) found that the effectiveness of any technology implementation
is directly connected to teacher preparedness, yet they claimed that “most teachers have
not had suitable training 5 to prepare them to use technology in their teaching” (p.
42).Kleiman (2000) observed that the lack of training and support to fully integrate

5
technology into the core of classroom instruction is so prevalent that computers tend to be
used “around the edges of the class’s main work”.
Dirksen and Tharp (2000) also found that integration of educational technology
has been primarily limited to “using technology as a resource tool” (p. 6). The concern
regarding teacher preparation for the effective utilization of educational technology was
reinforced by Cuban (1996), who posited that the technological revolution in schools has
been typically limited to a small cadre of determined users while the majority of teachers
remained casual or nonusers of the available technologies. Cuban also proposed that
teachers have lacked the access, skills, and knowledge necessary to properly utilize such
technology effectively in classrooms.
The preparedness of teachers to utilize technology was additionally addressed by
Ivers (2002), who found although most teachers have rated themselves as intermediate
users, they have not felt confident in using technology as a tool for student work.
Preparation to use technology was also a focus of a report issued by the Congress of the
United States (1995), which found a “majority of teachers report feeling inadequately
trained to use technology resources, particularly computer-based technologies” (p. 3).
As schools have continued to embrace and expand their use of educational
technology, teachers have often grappled with a lack of training in how best to integrate
technology into their pedagogical practice (Moursund & Bielefeldt, 1999). Acknowledging
that the use of technology has provided students “considerable motivation to work and
engage in learning” (Lockwood, 1998, p. 12). A movement toward more 6 constructivist-
oriented teaching and learning has been observed to incorporate technology in more
powerful ways (Ravitz, Becker, & Wong, 2000).

6
1.2 Problem Statement
The potential of educational technology to reform education is of primary interestto
educators, local education agencies, and legislators throughout the nation. There are a lot
of strategies to prevent students from sleeping during class. Research into the use of
technology for teacher’s productive learning tool to prevent students from sleeping during
classes exists, the problem remains that there is not enough known about the use of such
technology on the learning environment of secondary school classrooms, particularly on
how learners of all ages interact and react with one another when technology is integrated
into the learning process. At present, this issue is very rampant. Specially, for the teenagers
students because of hangover, laziness and lack of sleep.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
In an effort to embrace the teacher and student interaction by using technology. To
help the students from sleeping habit. To embrace the motivation to the students. To know
how teacher’s use technology in their daily teachings. The purpose of this study, therefore,
was to observe, describe, and analyze the use of educational technology on learner
interactions in Sacred Heart Diocesan School.
1.4 Significance of the Study
This study sought to discover the impact of technology use on learner interactions
in the private school have been provided through this analysis, and as such have added to

7
the knowledge base of how educational technology is affecting the learning environment
of students and teachers. Additionally, the research will contribute to the field of qualitative
research through an exploration of the impact of potentially conflicting roles of the
researcher on the researched.
1.5 Research Questions
The following research questions was developed to guide this study:
1. How technology affects your daily life?
2. How do technology helps you in your daily activities?
3. How do you control using technology in your daily life?
As technologies improving, technology affects in our daily life by helping things to get
easier and hi-tech. Technology helps us in our daily activities by getting things done
quicker and by to be aware the advancements or improvements of technology. Controlling
in using technology in daily life by knowing the limitations and managing our time on how,
when or where we use technology.
1.6 Research Hypothesis in Null For
Technology gives a good benefit to the humans not only for humans but also in a
certain society. It helps the teachers and students in their daily lives. Its limitations is only
controlled by individuals on how they will manage their time or handle the technology,
therefore technology has a good intentions to individuals and in the society.
1.7 Identification of Variables
The proposal talks about the use of technology as a productive learning tool which
curtails the relationship between the technology and the teachers. This means the teachers

8
will take handle on how they will use technology as their productive learning tool.Thus,
the independent variable is the technology while the independent variable is the teachers.
1.8 Assumptions and Limitations
The proposal is about the use of technology to the teachers and how they apply it
to the students to prevent sleeping during class. Teachers are already aware of the
improving technology. Assumptions of this proposal would be the respondent’s
opinion or own way on how they handle their students using technology by answering
the survey questions.
The proposal is limited only to the teachers and students. It only takes several time
as it covers only 1 month which is not enough to completely finish the research.

9
II. Review of Related Literature
This review of relevant literature has been designed to provide a knowledge base
of appropriate educational theory as well as an analysis of recent and past research in
the field of educational technology upon which the study was built. The review begins
with an exploration of the theoretical framework chosen to guide the study. Competing
theoretical frameworks are also explored as an acknowledgment that other approaches
or perspectives could have been used to frame the study.
The next section of the review presents applicable research from two decades of
technology use in schools, and features an overview of longitudinal studies as well as
literature involving more recent laptop and handheld computer initiatives. Finally,
literature is presented as a foundation for understanding the pedagogical beliefs and
practices of teachers in general, and how the evolution of technology integration has
been defined in classrooms over the course of the past twenty years.
There is conclusive evidence that digital equipment, tools and resources can, where
effectively used, raise the speed and depth of learning in science and mathematics for
primary and secondary age learners. There is indicative evidence that the same can be
said for some aspects of literacy, especially writing and comprehension.
The extent of the effect may be dampened by the level of capability of teachers to
use digital learning tools and resources effectively to achieve learning outcomes. More
effective use of digital teaching to raise attainment includes the ability of teachers to

10
identify how digital tools and resources can be used to achieve learning outcomes and
adapting their approach, as well as having knowledge and understanding of the
technology. This applies in all schools.
2.1 Perceptions of Technology in Daily Life
Almost every teacher will agree that a ringing cell phone disrupts academic
performance, but the practices regarding cell phones range from outright banning of
electronic devices to much more relaxed policies. Most teachers believe that electronic
devices are unnecessary for the students to have in the classroom, where students see
technology as an integral, day-to-day life item and essential for safety (Thomas, O’Bannon,
and Bolton, 2013).Some teachers continue to lecture students in a manner that may not
engage learners. Theirstudents, therefore,tend to believe that a classroom that is
disconnected from the so-called ‘real world’ is artificial and fake (Baker, Lusk, and
Neuhauser, 2012). PowerPoint software allows a teacher to present information in a visual
manner
(Goodin, 2012), however teachers who relied primarily on this technology were often
found as authoritative and the technology was seen as a negative (Baker, Lusk, and
Neuhauser, 2012).
2.2 Influence of Technology on Inclusive Education
There have been shortcomings in the development of accommodations for students
with learning disabilities using assistive technology. Floyd and Judge (2012) conducted a
study on the micro level, following the progress of six students who had some form of a

11
learning disability. The study was completed through the use of a piece of technology
called ClassMate Reader. A reading and comprehension passage was given to all students.
Students were then asked to test using traditional pen and paper methods, followed by a
second assignment completed using the ClassMate Reader. The results showed that the use
of assistive technology is an effective support and accommodation for students with
learning disabilities.In an effort to support the potentialof technology in the classroom to
strengthen inclusion of all types of learners, Futurelab (2009) published a report showing
a variety of ways that technology can support inclusive practice concepts. For instance,
mobile technologies help provide an authentic and meaningful learning experience.
2.3 Motivating Students with Technology
In a collaboration between several universities, Teo, Su Luan, &Sing (2008) explored
the future intent of pre-service teachers to use technology. The survey utilized items that
were validated from previous relevant research using the Technology Acceptance Model
(known as TAM). It was noted that there were differences between Singaporean and
Malaysian teachers on technology's percieved usefullness, perceived ease of use, and
computer attitudes. Despite their differences in stated beliefs, there wereno differences in
the behavioral intention towards technology acceptance.

12
III. Methodology
In this chapter, the researcher discusses the methods used and included in the research;
justifying the chosen research method, and describes the process of undertaking the study
and participants.
3.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the research methodology explains how the proposed study will be
fulfilled. It is appropriate to define the methods of data collection and illustrate the
composition and operation of the questionnaire survey in this chapter. The reported
study took place within a single secondary school and sought to address the research
question.
In that the researcher sought to discover patterns in the interactions of learners in
the private school environment, a logical choice for the research design chosen to guide
this study came from the naturalistic research tradition, which allowed for the deep
analysis of the phenomenon under study in the context of a natural environment.
Working with and beside the participants throughout the data collection process
provided the opportunity for exercising flexibility in the research design as the study
evolved over the course of several months.
As opposed to quantitative research and its reliance upon predetermined evaluation
instruments, Lincoln and Guba (1985) proposed that “naturalistic inquiry is always

13
carried out, logically enough, in natural setting, since context is so heavily implicated
in meaning” (p. 187). The qualitative research tradition often guides the research
designs of studies found in school settings, as the tradition allows the researcher to
“enter and spend considerable time in schools, families, neighborhoods, and other
locales learning about educational concerns...the data are collected on the premises and
supplemented by the understanding that is gained by being on location” (Bogdan &
Biklen, 2003, p. 4.)
3.2 Participants
Since the topic was all about the use of technology for teachers productive learning
tool to prevent students from sleeping during class, it includes teachers and students. The
participants in this study are teachers from a secondary school. The sample of overall 20
participants: 2 participants in each sampling frame: teachers from private and public
schools.
3.3 Setting
The research was conducted in a rural area particularly in the Municipality of
Molave Zamboanga del Sur. The data collected and sample participants came from this
area.
3.4 Instrumentation

14
In getting the pulse of the 20 participants from sampling frame regarding the proposed
dissolution of the technology, the survey instrument using questionnaires were used.
The survey consisted of 10 binary questions which assume one of two possible
values, yes or no. The first three questions are about the use and handling the technology.
The second three questions are regarding the effects of technology, and the remaining four
questions are about their judgment about the technology.

15
SURVEY QUESTIONS
Subject Handle:
Directions: Please read carefully and check the corresponding boxes for your answer.
SURVEY QUESTIONS:
YES NO
1. Is technology relevant in your daily teaching
skills?
2. Does technology helpful in your daily teachings?
3. Do you fine easy in using technology in your
daily teachings?
4. Does technology helps your students avoid
sleeping in class?
5. Do you agree that when you use technology in
your teaching strategies will help to improve
student class motivation?
6. Will you still continue the strategy even if it will
destruct the student capacity in learning?
7. Can you convince the students in your teaching
strategies?
8. Can you motivate your students using technology
in your teaching strategies?
9. Do you think the percentage of the student
capacity is high enough when you use technology
in you teaching?
10. Is technology enough in your teaching strategies?

16
3.5 Procedures
The first task of doing a research is to choose a topic. The topic the researcher chose in this
proposal is based on the current issue the society faces nowadays. After figuring out the
topic, the researcher then gathers data and information about the topic.
The researcher conducted a study to the teachers of both private and public schools.
The researcher provided a survey questionnaires to the respondents. The survey
questionnaire had completely return back to its original number. The contents was analyze
and the results is shown in the table and through the pie chart.
3.6 Design
A Survey research design was used to determine the teacher’s point of view if they
are in favor of modern technologies. Survey research design is usually done by doing
structured of self-administered questionnaires gives to sample respondents of the
population. In this research, the researcher used the survey questionnaires to gather data
from respondents.

17
3.7 Data Analysis
For the YES answers. The survey questionnaire have 20 participants.
Table 1. Calculation of Variance
N Xi (Score) Group mean (M)
(xi-1.1)
Variance
(xi-x)2
x1 16 1.8 3.24
x2 17 2.8 7.84
x3 15 0.8 0.64
x4 13 1.2 1.44
x5 18 3.8 14.44
x6 6 8.2 67.24
x7 17 2.8 7.84
x8 17 2.8 7.84
x9 12 2.2 4.84
x 10 11 3.2 10.24
Sum = 142/10
Mean= 14.2
(sum/10)
Sum = 29.6/10
Mean= 2.96
(sum/10)
Sum = 125.6/10
Mean = 12.56
SD = 3.54

18
Table 2. CALCULATIONS OF Z-SCORE
N Xi(Score) Group (m) xi-x Variance (xi-x)/ SD
x1 16 1.8 0.51
x2 17 2.8 0.79
x3 15 0.8 -2.74
x4 13 1.2 0.34
x5 18 3.8 1.07
x6 6 8.2 2.32
x7 17 2.8 0.79
x8 17 2.8 0.79
x9 12 2.2 0.62
x 10 11 3.2 0.90

19
Table 3. RESPONDENT’S POINTS
Respondent Points % Respondent Points %
1 16 80 11 4 20
2 17 85 12 3 15
3 15 75 13 5 25
4 13 65 14 7 35
5 18 90 15 2 10
6 6 30 16 14 70
7 17 85 17 3 15
8 17 85 18 3 15
9 12 60 19 8 40
10 11 55 20 9 45
For the NO answers. The survey questionnaire have 20 participants.
Table 4. Calculation of Variance
N Xi(Score) Group mean (M)
(xi-18.9)
Variance
(xi-x)2
x1 4 1.8 3.24

20
x2 3 2.8 7.84
x3 5 0.8 0.64
x4 7 1.2 1.44
x5 2 3.8 14.44
x6 14 8.2 67.24
x7 3 2.8 7.84
x8 3 2.8 7.84
x9 8 2.2 4.84
x 10 9 3.2 10.24
Sum =58/10
Mean= 5.8
(sum/10)
Sum =29.6/10
Mean= 2.96
(sum/10)
Sum = 125.6
Mean = 12.56
SD = 3.54
TABLE 5: CALCULATIONS OF Z-SCORE
N Xi (Score) Group Mean (m) Variance
x1 4 1.8 0.51
x2 3 2.8 0.79
x3 5 0.8 0.23

21
Table 6. TOTAL NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS ANSWERED
YES/NO
YES NO
Question #1 16 4
Question #2 17 3
Question #3 15 5
Question #4 13 7
Question #5 18 2
Question #6 6 14
Question #7 17 3
x4 7 1.2 0.34
x5 2 3.8 1.07
x6 14 8.2 2.32
x7 3 2.8 0.79
x8 3 2.8 0.79
x9 8 2.2 0.62
x10 9 3.2 0.90

22
Question #8 17 3
Question #9 12 8
Question #10 11 9
Total 142 58
Percentage 71% 29%

23
Pie Chart I.
Figure 1. Pie chart based on the results showed in table 6.
71%
29%
Respondent'sResponse
Yes
No

24
Figure 2. Bar chart based on the results showed in table 6.
0 5 10 15 20
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Question 4
Question 5
Question 6
Question 7
Question 8
Question 9
Question 10
Chart Title
NO YES

25
References
Baker, W. M., Lusk, E. J., & Neuhauser, K. L. (2012). On the use of cell phones
and other electronic devices in the classroom: Evidence from a survey of faculty and
students. Journal of Education for Business, 87, 275–289. Doi
10.1080/08832323.2011.622814
Berry, M.J., & Westfall, A. (2015). Dial D for distraction: The making and
breaking of cell phone policies in the college classroom. College Teaching, 63, 62–71.
doi:10.1080/87567555.2015.1005040
Bolkan, J. (2012, September 13). Report: Schools not meeting students’technology
needs.The Journal. Retrieved from http:/thejournal.com
Chudowsky, N., & Ginsburg, A. (2012, December).Who attends charter schools
and how are those students doing? Exploratory analysis of NAEP data. Retrieved from
National
AssessmentGoverningBoardwebsite:https://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/document
s/what-we-do/quarterly-board-meeting-materials/2012-11/charter-schools-naep-data-
analysis.pdf

26
Courville, K. (2011). Technology and its use in education: Present roles and future
prospects. Paper presented at the Recovery School District Technology Summit, Baton
Rouge, LA.
Eckstein, M. (2009). Enrichment 2.0: Gifted and talented education for the 21st
century. Gifted Child Today, 32(1), 59–63. doi:10.4219/gct-2009-841
Edwards, B. (2009, October 25). Classic PCs vs. new PCs: Their true cost.
Technologizer. Retrieved from http://www.technologizer.com
Egbert, J. (2009). Supporting learning with technology: Essentials of classroom
practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ehrlich, S.B., Sporte, S. E., & Sebring, P. (2013, April). The use of technology in
Chicago public schools 2011: Perspectives from students, teachers, and principals.
Retrieved from University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research website:
https://consortium.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Technology%20Report%
202013_0.pdf
Ernst, J. V., & Moye, J. J. (2013). Social adjustment of at-risk technology education
students. Journal of Technology Education, 24(2), 2–13. doi:10.21061/jte.v24i2.a.1
Flanagan, S., Bouck, E. C., Richardson, J. (2013). Middle school special education
teachers’ perceptions and use of assistive technology in literacy instruction. Assistive
Technology, 25, 24–30. doi:10.1080/10400435.2012.682697
Floyd, K.K., & Judge, S. L. (2012). The efficacy of assistive technology on reading
comprehension for postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Assistive Technology
Outcomes and Benefits, 8, 48–64. doi:10.1080/10400435.2012.682697

27
Ford, K., & Lott, L (2011). The impact of technology on constructivist pedagogies.
Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/a/boisestate.edu/edtechtheories/the-impact-of-
technology-on-constructivist-pedagogies-1

Proposal final

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Proposal final

Recently uploaded

Proposal final