
In the last several years, educators and researchers have looked at how teachers incorporate technology into their classrooms and how it can support student learning.
But what does this look like in early childhood and elementary education, where play-based, hands-on experiences are highly valued to encourage children’s learning?
College of Education & Human Development Assistant Professor Ju Lim and Peter Wardrip from the University of Wisconsin-Madison co-authored a study in Teachers and Teaching on how college students preparing to become early childhood and elementary teachers use technology in classrooms.
Lim and Wardrip created a model called the Technology Integration as a Spectrum (TIS) to support a nuanced understanding of technology use and to introduce diverse approaches to integrating technology in practices. The TIS model outlines four specific types – Software-guided Use, Instructional Use, Guided Use and Free Use – based on who initiates the technology use, who directs its use and whether the experience is connected to explicit learning goals.
“Guided Use and Free Use allow children to direct the use of digital devices, while in Instructional Use and Software-Guided Use, the use of technology is directed by adults or pre-programmed/self-contained software,” they wrote.
They used the TIS model to guide the data collection and analysis for their study, which focused on seven undergraduate early childhood and elementary education students at a midwestern university.
The seven participants were divided into two groups: Group 1 was comprised of students in their final semester, who were student teaching four and a half days a week; and Group 2 had students in their second-to-last semester and were student teaching one and a half days a week.
For Group 1, the research team conducted classroom observations over a 10-week period and studied their lesson plans, lesson reflections, photos of technology use and other documentation from participants’ student teaching sessions. Group 2 completed weekly self-reflection journals on their student teaching, and the researchers met with each of these participants monthly to discuss their journals.
Lim and Wardrip found that most technology use fell into the Instructional category (60 percent), where pre-service teachers lead a lesson and incorporate technology to help students reach specific learning objectives, and the Software-Guided category (33 percent), where children use devices, apps or software that direct them toward a learning goal.
Study participants said that digital learning during and after COVID-19 impacted their decision to use software-guided instruction in their lesson planning.
“Children were not performing at their expected grade levels and exhibited a wide range of academic performance gaps. This situation challenged adults to deliver lessons and activities that met the need of all children in the classroom,” the researchers explained. “Study participants shared that having individualized Chromebooks seemed to be one of the effective ways to provide learning materials tailored to each child’s literacy and math learning.”
Pre-service teachers often made decisions to use technology to support children’s academic content goals. However, Lim and Wardrip also found instances of disconnect between the intended technology use and how it worked in practice – particularly for lessons in the Software-guided and Guided categories. For example, during classroom observations, the research team noted times when children were asked to do a follow-up task on a laptop, and some didn’t log into the application as instructed or weren’t engaged in that task.
While there were times when technology use encouraged and supported children’s engagement and active learning, instances of Software-guided and Guided uses often led to misalignments between pre-service teachers’ intentions and actual practices. This highlights the importance of examining how the actual implementation unfolded.
Noting these disconnects are among several considerations that educators should keep in mind when planning lessons with technology.
“It is essential to ensure that the technology is developmentally appropriate and aligned with the children’s current abilities and needs so that technology integration can be effective and meaningful,” the researchers wrote. “This requires careful consideration of both the technology itself and how it is integrated into classroom practices. While technology can offer many benefits in supporting learning, it is important to use it in ways that both effective and appropriate for young children.”
About the Researcher
Ju Lim
Department of Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Ju Lim is an assistant professor of creative and innovative education in the Department of Early Childhood and Elementary Education. She examines informed, creative and equitable technology practices in early childhood and elementary education, encompassing both formal and informal settings. Her current research focuses on the intersection of developmentally appropriate practice and technology integration, leveraging the assets of young children and educators.
Citation
Lim, J., and Wardrip, P. (2024). “Technology Integration as a Spectrum: Integrating Technology in Early Childhood Classrooms.” Teachers and Teaching, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2024.2420137