Assignment 4

Integrating Emerging Technology (TIM) into the Curriculum

by
Sylvia Rodriguez
EDD 7914 CRN 23508
Curriculum Teaching and Technology

Nova Southeastern University

November 2, 2014

Abstract
Integrating technology into the curriculum has become a priority in schools. Students are
using technological devices to complete assigned lessons and assessments that fulfill the
requirements of the Common Core Standards. The Technology Integration Matrix (TIM)
is a visual chart of goals that educators utilize to know where they currently stand in
technological integration of learning. It is also a series of planned goals to achieve effective
integration of technological learning. The TIM is composed of 25 cells outlining different
levels of instruction. It outlines five different characteristics of meaningful learning
environments: active, collaborative, constructive, authentic, and goal directed. It also
outlines five levels of technology integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and
transformation. Each type of learning environment and technology integration has its own
indicator that explains how students are exercising technological use in their learning.
This paper describes the manner in which an urban elementary school is currently utilizing
Collaborative/Entry (Matrix Cell B1) and how it plans to reach Goal Directed/ Entry
(Matrix Cell E1). The technology that will be used to reach the goal is Accelerated Reader
(AR) by Renaissance Learning. This reading program engages students in comprehension
assessments for all genres of reading. The utilization of this program is at cell Goal
Directed/Entry (Matrix Cell E1) because the students will use technology to enhance
their comprehension skills. This is expected to also to prepare students for their annual
standardized test. Students will take assessments from books they have read at their reading
instructional level.

3
Integrating Emerging Technology (TIM) into the Curriculum
The Florida Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) (Appendix C) is an illustrative
tool that explains to educators how they can use technology to promote student learning.
Welsh, Harmes, and Winkelman (2011) explained that the TIM shows five characteristics
of meaningful learning environments: active, constructive, goal directed, authentic, and
collaborative. Each of the characteristics is associated with five levels of technology
integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation. Together, the five
levels of technology and learning environments create 25 cells and was created to be a
comprehensive framework for evaluating technology integration into the curriculum. It
provides details on the focus of the teacher, students, and the learning environment (Welsh,
et al., 2011).
According to Smaldino, Lowther, Russell, and Mims (2015), the ultimate value of
technology in education depends on how well and how effective it is integrated into the
curriculum. As an example of this, the TIM allows educators to view videos of instruction
in the classroom for each cell. This gives educators the opportunity to analyze which cell
their classroom is currently utilizing and which goal is planned to be achieved.
Current Technology Use in the Classroom
School N is an urban, Title I, elementary school located in Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Currently, the desktop computers that are available to the students are not working
properly. Therefore, the computers cannot support effective reading programs for the
students. Currently, the integration of emerging technology at School N is
Collaborative/Entry (Matrix Cell B1) of the TIM (Appendix A). As displayed in the video
for Cell B1, the teacher utilizes a laptop computer to display a reading passages

4
vocabulary words. The teacher initiates and facilitates a discussion about the words using
background knowledge. After each word is discussed, the teacher shows a picture of the
word. The same procedure is followed after a guided reading of the non-illustrated reading
passage is completed. The students use their imagination to picture the reading in their
minds. As they see the pictures after the story is read, they compare the picture in their
mind to the illustration of the reading passage. The students and teachers discuss the
similarities and differences.
In this collaborative learning lesson, the students are not actively manipulating
technology. Rather, it is shown by the teacher. Students are able to view how technology
can be incorporated into a lesson. They recognize the impact technology has in making
reading more interesting and engaging.
Goal Cell and Lesson
The school purchases its technology items from state and district funds. Recently
at School N, laptops were purchased for each grade level and repairs were made to the
existing desktop computers. The 20 laptops are going to be rotated between the grade level
classrooms so that each student will have the opportunity to work on a laptop. Some grade
levels will prefer to share by distributing five laptops to each teacher every day.
A few weeks ago, the school purchased the license for AR by Renaissance Learning.
This reading program, which also offers math instruction, asks 5-10 comprehension
questions. There has been controversy between the teachers and with the principal
concerning whether or not the students should be allowed to use their books when
answering the questions. Some teachers have argued that the students should be allowed to
do so since students are encouraged to look back in the reading passage when

5
taking the standardized test. Currently, by decision of the principal, the students will not
be allowed to look back in the stories for the answers.
The goal cell for technology integration is Goal Directed/Entry (Matrix Cell E1)
of the TIM (Appendix B). The students will be using technology as a tool for learning and
practicing reading skills and strategies. The teacher will be using technology to deliver
review and reinforcement of the reading skills and strategies outlined in the curriculum. In
this cell, the students will search for the story they read by typing in the title or author of
the book. After the book appears on the screen, the students will follow a series of prompts
to answer 1-5 or 1-10 comprehension questions of the story using a remote responder. The
students will receive immediate feedback by viewing the percentage of correctly answered
questions. Afterwards, the process will be repeated as the students read various books and
take reading comprehension assessments. Regularly, the teacher will print out a weekly or
monthly report indicating the progress, or decline, of each students reading skills. Through
integration of Matrix Cell E1 (Appendix B), the students will utilize technology in their
learning because they will receive immediate feedback not only from their score, but also
from viewing what the correct answer was.
Comparing the Planned Lesson with the Goal Lesson
The similarity between School Ns goal lesson and the lesson displayed in Matrix
Cell E1 (Appendix B), is that the students will use computers and responders to complete a
reading assignment. The students will read and answer comprehension questions directly
on the computer. They will not use pencil and paper to mark their answers nor flip pages
manually back and forth to search for answers. Both lessons also allow students to receive

6
immediate feedback from their assessment. The teacher can facilitate learning by creating a
graph for each student showing their progress, or decline, from one assessment to the other.
Timeline with Benchmark
Week
Week 1
Week 2

Week 3

Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
Week 8

Week 9
Week 10

Benchmark
Accelerated Reader (AR) program explained
to the students using an interactive
whiteboard.
Before going to the media center, students
will be given their reading instructional
level so that they can choose 3 chapter
books that are appropriate for their reading
level. Students are to read one of their
chapter books throughout the week during
Drop Everything and Read (DEAR) time.
Teacher reviews the AR program. Teacher
assigns AR assessment with a responder to
each student. Student views immediate
feedback from the assessment.
Students are to read their second chapter
book throughout the week during Drop
Everything and Read (DEAR) time.
Teacher assigns AR assessment with a
responder to each student. Student views
immediate feedback from the assessment.
Students are to read their third chapter book
throughout the week during Drop
Everything and Read (DEAR) time.
Teacher assigns AR assessment with a
responder to each student. Student views
immediate feedback from the assessment.
Students return and choose three different
chapter books from the media center.
Students are to read one of their chapter
books throughout the week during Drop
Everything and Read (DEAR) time
Teacher assigns AR assessment with a
responder to each student. Student views
immediate feedback from the assessment.
Same instructions apply for each quarter.

Literature Review
Technology is so prevalent today that engaging students with lessons using
technological devices is becoming a trend in education today (Chase, 2013). Software
programs and technological devices complement classroom instruction and bring together
students and teachers in a virtual community that promotes student success (Chase, 2013).
Students need to learn to welcome challenges as a necessary part of growth. For students to
move beyond reciting someone elses ideas and going through the motions of learning, they
need to truly understand the subject and actually see their accomplishments from one task
to another. The more students are required to merely remember, the more bored they
become. The result is a decrease in their academic performance (Zmuda, 2008).
Self-regulated Learning (SRL) is the process of attaining and maintaining goals. It
includes goal establishment, planning, striving, and revision. Goal establishment refers to
adopting goals, planning is preparing to pursue a goal, striving is moving towards or
maintaining a goal, and revision is changing a goal. Teachers set goals and think about the
strategies needed to achieve them. They monitor students progress and recognize when
they deviate away from it (Banyard, Underwood, & Twiner, 2006). Students SRL can be
promoted through technology because students experience an enhanced motivation to learn
when involved in technological assignments and exercises. There is evidence that
motivation is promoted by advanced technologies (Banyard et al., 2006). Students who are
not on task, or not challenged enough, become disruptive and do not have a desire to learn
(McCracken, 2005).

8
Accelerated Reader (AR) software aids students reading curriculum. Students
receive instruction at their instructional reading level followed by feedback to help teachers
target their instruction. Students reading ability has improved and the performance gap
between high-achieving students and low-achieving students has decreased. In a 1 year
study conducted in Chicago, IL, three urban elementary schools, grades one through four,
showed improvement in their reading skills when using the AR program compared to
schools that did not use the AR program. There had been a 4.1 increase in reading gains in
first grade, a 54.8 gain in second grade, a 37.4 gain in third grade, and a 55.6 gain in fourth
grade.
When literacy instruction is implemented through technology, reading is transformed
as it becomes more engaging and effective for students. The Common Core Sate Standards
urges students to be able to comprehend texts of steadily increasing complexity throughout
their school years.
Conclusion
The Technology Integration Matrix (2007) is a useful tool for educators to examine
their use of technology in the classroom. Its online videos offer an insight as to how
technology can be incorporated into science, language arts, math, and social studies
lessons.
With the growing inclusion of technology in almost every field, educators must prepare
students to be able to attain and maintain a career that employs technology savvy
individuals. By integrating technology in the elementary through high school years,
students are given the tools they need to grow and learn in our ever-changing technological
society.

Appendix A

Collaborative Learning | Entry Level | Language Arts

Objectives

Students
Students
Students
Students

will
will
will
will

verbalize what they read.

be introduced to new vocabulary words while reading.
view a map to locate Peru, where the article takes place.
use details from text to support their thinking.

Procedure

Students will read an article about Mummies that has all the pictures
removed from the article.
Students will read the text.
Students will discuss what they visualize in their minds while reading.
Students will observe the pictures that had been removed from the article.
Students will discuss the vocabulary from the text.

Materials

Laptop computer
An article with the pictures removed
A Power Point that contains the images from the article and new vocabulary
words introduced in the article.

Grade Level: 3-5

10

Appendix B

Goal Directed Learning | Entry Level |

Language Arts
Objectives

Students will use computers and responders to complete a reading assessment.

Procedure

Students will read passages on the computer.

They will use remote responders to answer multiple choice and short answer
questions.
They will receive immediate results upon completion of their test.

Materials

Computers
Remote responders

PDF version of reading assessment

Grade Level: 3-5

11

Appendix C
Levels of Technology Integration into the Curriculum
Where do you fit into the Matrix?
Where do you want to be? What is your goal?
1

2
Adoption

Technology

Entry

Integration
Matrix

The teacher uses

technology to deliver
curriculum content to
students.

The teacher directs

students in the
conventional use of
tool-based software.
If such software is
available, this level
is the recommended

Indicator:

Indicator:

Students use
technology for drill and
practice and computer
based training

Students begin to
utilize technology
tools to create
products, for
example using a
word processor to
create a report.

Indicator:
Students primarily
work alone when using
technology.

A Active
Students are actively
engaged in using
technology as a tool
rather than passively
receiving information
from the technology

B Collaborativ
e
Students use
technology tools to
collaborate with others
rather than working
individually at all
times.

C Constructive
Students use
technology tools to
build understanding
rather than simply
receive information.

D Authentic
Students use
technology tools to
solve real-world
problems meaningful
to them rather than
working on artificial
assignments

3
Adaptation

4
Infusion

5
Transformation

The teacher
creates a learning
environment that
infuses the power
of technology
tools throughout
the day across
subject areas

The teacher creates a rich

learning environment in
which students regularly
engage in activities that
would have been
impossible to achieve
without technology.

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Students have
opportunities to
select and modify
technology tools to
accomplish specific
purposes, for
example using
colored cells on a
spreadsheet to
plan a garden.

Throughout the
school day,
students are
empowered to
select appropriate
technology tools
and actively apply
them to the tasks
at hand.

Given ongoing access to

online resources, students
actively select and pursue
topics beyond the
limitations of even the best
school library

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Students have
opportunities to
utilize collaborative
tools, such as email,
in conventional
ways.

Students have
opportunities to
select and modify
technology tools to
facilitate
collaborative
work.

Throughout the
day and across
subject areas,
students utilize
technology tools
to facilitate
collaborative
learning.

Technology enables
students to collaborate
with peers and experts
irrespective of time zone
or physical distances

Indicator:

Indicator

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Technology is used to
deliver information to
students..

Students begin to
utilize constructive
tools such as
graphic organizers
to build upon prior
knowledge and
construct meaning.

Students have
opportunities to
select and modify
technology tools to
assist them in the
construction of
understanding.

Students utilize
technology to
make connections
and construct
understanding
across disciplines
and throughout
the day.

Students use technology

to construct, share, and
publish knowledge to a
worldwide audience.

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Students use
technology to complete
assigned activities that
are generally unrelated
to real-world problems.

Students have
opportunities to
apply technology
tools to some
content-specific
activities that are
based on real-world
problems.

Students have
opportunities to
select and modify
technology tools to
solve problems
based on realworld issues.

Students select
appropriate
technology tools
to complete
authentic tasks
across disciplines

By means of technology
tools, students participate
in outside-of-school
projects and problemsolving activities that have
meaning for the students
and the community

The teacher
encourages
adaptation of toolbased software by
allowing students
to select a tool and
modify its use to
accomplish the
task at hand.

12
E Goal
Directed
Students use
technology tools to set
goals, plan activities,
monitor progress, and
evaluate results rather
than simply
completing
assignments without
reflection.

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Indicator:

Students receive
directions, guidance,
and feedback from
technology, rather than
using technology tools
to set goals, plan
activities, monitor
progress, or selfevaluate.

From time to time,

students have the
opportunity to use
technology to either
plan, monitor, or
evaluate an activity.

Students have
opportunities to
select and modify
the use of
technology tools to
facilitate goalsetting, planning,
monitoring, and
evaluating specific
activities.

Students use
technology tools
to set goals, plan
activities, monitor
progress, and
evaluate results
throughout the
curriculum.

Students engage in
ongoing metacognitive
activities at a level that
would be unattainable
without the support of
technology tools.

Appendix D

Peer-Reviewed Research Support for

Renaissance Learning Tools
As of October 2014
Reading
Accelerated Reader
Hansen, L. E., Collins, P., & Warschauer, M. (2009). Reading management programs: A
review of the research. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 10(3), 5580. Available
online from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/242092035_Reading_Management_Programs_
A_Review_of_the_Research/file/72e7e529e12900dbfe.pdf
Husman, J., Brem, S., & Duggan, M. A. (2005). Student goal orientation and formative
assessment. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 9(3), 355359. Available online from
http://www.rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/5oct3047l5.htm
Johnson, R. A., & Howard, C. A. (2003). The effects of the Accelerated Reader program
on the reading comprehension of pupils in grades three, four, and five. The Reading
Matrix, 3(3), 8796. Available online from
http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/johnson_howard/article.pdf
McGlinn, J., & Parrish, A. (2002). Accelerating ESL students' reading progress with
Accelerated Reader. Reading Horizons, 42(3), 175189. Available online from
http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1186&context=reading_horizons
Nunnery, J. A., Ross, S. M., & McDonald, A. (2006). A randomized experimental
evaluation of the impact of Accelerated Reader/Reading Renaissance implementation
on reading achievement in grades 3 to 6. Journal of Education for Students Placed At
Risk, 11(1), 118. Available online from
http://www.memphis.edu/crep/pdfs/Accelerated_Reader_JESPAR_11_1__1-18.pdf
Peak, J. P., & Dewalt, M. W. (1994). Reading achievement: Effects of computerized
reading management and enrichment. ERS Spectrum, 12(1), 3135.

13
Rodriguez, S. (2007). The Accelerated Reader program's relationship to student
achievement on the English-Language Arts California Standards Test. The Reading
Matrix, 7(3), 191205. Available online from
http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/rodriguez/article.pdf
Shannon, L. C., Styers, M. K., Wilkerson, S. B., & Peery, E. (in press). Computer-assisted
learning in elementary reading: A randomized control trial. Computers in the Schools.
Topping, K. J. (in press). Fiction and non-fiction reading and comprehension in preferred
books. Reading Psychology.
Topping, K. J., & Fisher, A. M. (2003). Computerized formative assessment of reading
comprehension: Field trials in the U.K. Journal of Research in Reading, 26(3), 267279.
Available online from http://www.renlearn.co.uk/wp

References
Accelerated Reader Software and AR Best Practices website. Retrieved from
http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet?R001249321GBF31D.pdf
Banyard, P., Underwood, J., & Twiner, A. (2006). Do enhanced communication
technologies inhibit or facilitate self-regulated learning? European Journal of
Education, 41(3), 473-489.
Chase, J. (2013). Taking technology to its limit. District Administration, 49(2), 24-26.
McCracken, P. (2005). Cooperative learning as a classroom management strategy.
Momentum, 36(4), 10-12.
Renaissance Learning: A commitment to research website. Retrieved from
http://www.renaissance.com/Resources/Research
Renaissance Learning: Renaissance Learning Videos website. Retrieved from
http://www.renaissance.com/Resources/Videos
Smaldino, S. E., Lowther, D. L., Russell, J. D., & Mims, C. (2015). Instructional
technology and media for learning (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Technology Integration Matrix (2007). Levels of technology integration into the
curriculum. Retrieved from http://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/
Zmuda, A. (2008). Springing into active learning. Educational Leadership, 66(3), 38-42.