Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Process over product: the next evolution of our quest for technology integration

  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the next evolution of our quest for technology integration, one that moves away from the product of teacher decision making (i.e., the type of use) towards their process of decision making. After presenting a brief history of our field’s quest, we bring together three ideas about teacher decision making with technology that have emerged through the research: technology integration is (1) value driven, (2) embedded in a dynamic system, and (3) a product of a teacher’s perception of what is possible. We then combine these ideas into a model of teacher decision making with technology that reflects how a teacher decides to integrate technology within a dynamic system. Implications for teacher beliefs research, professional development, and technology integration practice are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adolph, K. E., & Kretch, K. S. (2015). Gibson’s theory of perceptual learning. International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences,10, 127–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, E. L., Gearhart, M., & Herman, J. L. (1990). Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT) evaluation study first- and second-year findings (Report No. 7). Cupertino, CA: Apple Computer, Inc.

  • Barsalou, L. W. (2009). Simulation, situated conceptualization, and prediction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,364(1521), 1281–1289. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barsalou, L. W. (2015). Situated conceptualization: Theory and applications. In Y. Coello & M. H. Fischer (Eds.), Perceptual and emotional embodiment: Foundations of embodied cognition (pp. 19–45). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baylor, A. L., & Ritchie, D. (2002). What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers & Education,39(4), 395–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00075-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning, and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right? Educational Policy Analysis Archives,8(51), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n51.2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. J., Ravitz, J. L., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers and software. Teaching, learning, and computing: 1998 National Survey Report #3. Irvine, CA, and Minneapolis, MN: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine, and University of Minnesota.

  • Blackwell, C. K., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. (2014). Factors influencing digital technology use in early childhood education. Computers & Education,77, 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush, T. (2003). Introduction to the special issue on preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology (PT3). Educational Technology Research and Development,51(1), 39–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buehl, M. M., & Beck, J. S. (2015). The relationship between teacher beliefs and practices. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teacher beliefs (pp. 66–84). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, C., Saye, J., & Brush, T. (2015). Supporting in-service teachers' professional teaching knowledge with educatively scaffolded digital curriculum. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education,15(4), 568–599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., Tsai, C. C., & Tan, L. L. W. (2011). Modeling primary school pre-service teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education,57(1), 1184–1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. H. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? The Journal of Educational Research,102(1), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.102.1.65-75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., Shope, R., Plano Clark, V. L., & Green, D. O. (2006). How interpretive qualitative research extends mixed methods research. Research in the Schools,13(1), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal,38(4), 813–834. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Reshaping teaching policy, preparation, and practice: Influences of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Koster, S., Volman, M., & Kuiper, E. (2017). Concept-guided development of technology in ‘traditional’ and ‘innovative’ schools: Quantitative and qualitative differences in technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development,65(5), 1325–1344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9527-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher,38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, D. C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J. H. (1990). Teacher beliefs and practices part I: Patterns of change the evolution of teachers’ instructional beliefs and practices in high-access-to-technology classrooms first–fourth fear findings (Report No. 8). Cupertino, CA: Apple Computer, Inc.

  • Dwyer, D. C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J. H. (1991). Changes in teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-rich classrooms. Educational Leadership,48(8), 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Er, E., & Kim, C. (2017). Episode-centered guidelines for teacher belief change toward technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development,65(4), 1041–1065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9518-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development,47(4), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs? The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development,53(4), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2013). Removing obstacles to the pedagogical changes required by Jonassen's vision of authentic technology-enabled learning. Computers & Education,64, 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,42(3), 255–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education,59(2), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evolution, n. Def. 7a. (2008). In Oxford English dictionary (3rd ed.). Retrieved from www-oed-com

  • Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2012). Spring cleaning for the “messy” construct of teachers’ beliefs: What are they? Which have been examined? What can they tell us? In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, T. Urdan, J. M. Royer, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook, individual differences and cultural and contextual factors (Vol. 2, pp. 471–499). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13274-019

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, M. G., & Fives, H. (2015). Introduction. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teacher beliefs (pp. 1–11). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, T. F. (1971). The activities of teaching. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use. TechTrends,60(5), 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. (2005). Our agenda for technology integration: It’s time to choose. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education,5(2), 116–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heitink, M., Voogt, J., Verplanken, L., van Braak, J., & Fisser, P. (2016). Teachers’ professional reasoning about their pedagogical use of technology. Computers & Education,101, 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies,37(2), 155–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000276961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary school teachers’ educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers & Education,51(4), 1499–1509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development,55(3), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hixon, E., & Buckenmeyer, J. (2009). Revisiting technology integration in schools: Implications for professional development. Computers in the Schools,26(2), 130–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380560902906070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist,42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, S. K., Chan, A., Mozejko, A., & Caputi, P. (2015). Technology practices: Confirmatory factor analysis and exploration of teachers' technology integration in subject areas. Computers & Education,90, 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J., Thomas, R., & Scharber, C. (2006). Assessing technology integration: The RAT—Replacement, amplification, and transformation- framework. In Proceedings of the society for information technology & teacher education international conference (pp. 1616–1620). Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

  • Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010a). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development,58(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010b). Laptops in the K-12 classrooms: Exploring factors impacting instructional use. Computers & Education,55(3), 937–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends,43(2), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02818172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Marra, R., & Crismond, D. (2008). Meaningful learning with technology (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judson, E. (2006). How teachers integrate technology and their beliefs about learning: Is there a connection? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,14(3), 581–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan, M. S. H., & Markauskaite, L. (2018). Technical and vocational teachers’ conceptions of ICT in the workplace: Bridging the gap between teaching and professional practice. Journal of Educational Computing Research,56(7), 1099–1128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117740396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education,29, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmons, R., & Hall, C. (2016). Toward a broader understanding of teacher technology integration beliefs and values. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,24(3), 309–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh, J. H. L. (2019). TPACK design scaffolds for supporting teacher pedagogical change. Educational Technology Research and Development,67(3), 577–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9627-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, L. (2017). Learning first, technology second: The educator's guide to designing authentic lessons. Portland, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopcha, T. J. (2010). A systems-based approach to technology integration using mentoring and communities of practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 175–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1109–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2008). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lei, J. (2010). Quantity versus quality: A new approach to examine the relationship between technology use and student outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology,41(3), 455–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00961.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology uses and student achievement: A longitudinal study. Computers & Education,49(2), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.06.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S. H. (2011). Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration. Computers & Education,56(4), 1012–1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, F., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Dawson, K., & Barron, A. E. (2017). Explaining technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A multilevel path analysis model. Educational Technology Research and Development,65(4), 795–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9487-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M., Ko, Y., Willmann, A., & Fickert, C. (2018). Examining the role of professional development in a large school district’s iPad initiative. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,50(1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1387743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Strahl, D., & Ross, S. M. (2008). Does technology integration "work" when key barriers are removed? Educational Media International,45(3), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980802284317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maeng, J. L., Mulvey, B. K., Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2013). Preservice teachers’ TPACK: Using technology to support inquiry instruction. Journal of Science Education and Technology,22(6), 838–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9434-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, W., Strother, S., Beglau, M., Bates, L., Reitzes, T., & Culp, K. M. (2010). Connecting instructional technology professional development to teacher and student outcomes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,43(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, A. W., Hollebrands, K., Lee, H., Harrison, T., & Mutlu, A. (2018). Factors that influence secondary mathematics teachers’ integration of technology in mathematics lessons. Computers & Education,123, 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S., & Roblin, N. P. (2018). Connecting research and practice: Teacher inquiry and design-based research. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K.-W. Lai (Eds.), Second handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 1–14). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_30-2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, K., O'Malley, K., Ruzic, R., Horsley, M. K., Franey, J. J., & Bassett, K. (2016). Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,48(3), 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1175856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record,108(6), 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology,23(3), 40–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouza, C. (2009). Does research-based professional development make a difference? A longitudinal investigation of teacher learning in technology integration. Teachers College Record,111(5), 1195–1241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouza, C., & Barrett-Greenly, T. (2015). Bridging the app gap: An examination of a professional development initiative on mobile learning in urban schools. Computers & Education,88, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Ross, C., & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating variables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with limited integration. Computers & Education,51(4), 1523–1537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education,55(3), 1321–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palak, D., & Walls, R. T. (2009). Teachers’ beliefs and technology practices: A mixed-methods approach. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,41(4), 417–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittman, T., & Gaines, T. (2015). Technology integration in third, fourth and fifth grade classrooms in a Florida school district. Educational Technology Research and Development,63(4), 539–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9391-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polly, D., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Examining how learner-centered professional development influences teachers’ espoused and enacted practices. The Journal of Educational Research,104(2), 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671003636737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Project Tomorrow. (2017). Trends in digital learning: Building teachers’ capacity and competency to create new learning experiences for students. Retrieved from https://tomorrow.org/speakup/speak-up-2016-trends-digital-learning-june-2017.html

  • Puentedura, R. (2014). Building transformation: An introduction to the SAMR model [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2014/08/22/BuildingTransformation_AnIntroductionToSAMR.pdf

  • Quest, n.2. Def. 4a. (2007). In Oxford English dictionary online (3rd ed.). Retrieved from www-oed-com

  • Richardson, M. J., & Chemero, A. (2014). Complex dynamical systems and embodiment. In L. Shapiro (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of embodied cognition (1st ed., pp. 39–50). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringstaff, C., Yocam, K., & Marsh, J. (1996). Integrating technology into classroom instruction: An assessment of the impact of the ACOT teacher development center project (Report No. 22). Cupertino, CA: Apple Computer, Inc.

  • Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sang, G., Valcke, M., van Braak, J., Tondeur, J., & Zhu, C. (2011). Predicting ICT integration into classroom teaching in Chinese primary schools: Exploring the complex interplay of teacher-related variables. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,27(2), 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00383.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1991). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Oxford: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellars, M. (2017). Reflective practice for teachers (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shifflet, R., & Weilbacher, G. (2015). Teacher beliefs and their influence on technology use: A case study. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education,15(3), 368–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skott, J. (2015). The promises, problems, and prospects of research on teachers’ beliefs. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teacher beliefs (pp. 13–30). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tondeur, J., Hermans, R., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). Exploring the link between teachers’ educational belief profiles and different types of computer use in the classroom. Computers in Human Behavior,24(6), 2541–2553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: a systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development,65(3), 555–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vongkulluksn, V. W., Xie, K., & Bowman, M. A. (2018). The role of value on teachers’ internalization of external barriers and externalization of personal beliefs for classroom technology integration. Computers & Education,118, 70–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, F., & Reeves, T. C. (2003). Why do teachers need to use technology in their classrooms? Issues, problems, and solutions. Computers in the Schools,20(4), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v20n04_05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, L., Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2004). Increasing preservice teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,36(3), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2004.10782414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S. K., Hsu, H. Y., Reeves, T. C., & Coster, D. C. (2014). Professional development to enhance teachers' practices in using information and communication technologies (ICTs) as cognitive tools: Lessons learned from a design-based research study. Computers & Education,79, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, G. (2006). Technology professional development: Long-term effects on teacher self-efficacy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,14(1), 151–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weston, M. E., & Bain, A. (2010). The end of techno-critique: The naked truth about 1:1 laptop initiatives and educational change. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment,9(6), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal,40(4), 807–840. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040004807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record,104(3), 482–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., Lei, J., & Frank, K. A. (2006). The social life of technology: An ecological analysis of technology diffusion in schools. Pedagogies,1, 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not conducted with any funding sources.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Georgia, 205 River’s Crossing, 850 College Station Road, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

    Theodore J. Kopcha & Elizabeth Pitman

  2. Oklahoma State University, 212 Willard Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    Kalianne L. Neumann

  3. Indiana University, Wright Education 2220, 201 North Rose Avenue, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

    Anne Ottenbreit-Leftwich

Authors
  1. Theodore J. Kopcha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kalianne L. Neumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne Ottenbreit-Leftwich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elizabeth Pitman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theodore J. Kopcha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kopcha, T.J., Neumann, K.L., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. et al. Process over product: the next evolution of our quest for technology integration. Education Tech Research Dev 68, 729–749 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09735-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09735-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation