Influential Factors in Modeling SPARK Science Learning System

Marie Paz Escaño Morales

Abstract


The study is focused on the exploration of influential factors in modelling PASCO-designed technology in science classes. Mixed method was employed to critically explore how the SPARK Science Learning System is meaningfully integrated into the teaching of selected topics in Earth and Environmental Science. It is focused on the feasibility as well as the effectiveness of using the SPARK Science Learning System as a primary tool in learning science that leads to learning and achievement of the students. Correlation of the ability of the technology to develop high intrinsic motivation to student achievement was utilized to identify important factors in designing framework on how to meaningfully integrate SPARK Science Learning System in teaching Earth and Environmental Science. Research instruments used in this study were adopted from standardized questionnaires available from literature. Achievement test and SPARK Science Learning System evaluation form were developed and validated for the purpose of deducing data needed for the study. Interviews were done to cull the deeper thoughts and emotions of the participants. Data deduced from these interviews were used to validate all numerical data extracted from the study. Analysis of the data was done to disclose some recurring themes, problems and benefits derived by the students in using the SPARK Science Learning System to further institute its effect in the curriculum as a precursor to towards envisioning the 21st century learning.


Keywords


Environmental Science; Technology Integration, Pedagogy

Full Text:

PDF

References


Brookhart, S.M., Walsh, J.M., & Zientarski, W.A. (2006). The Dynamics of Motivation and Efforts

for Classroom Assessments in Middle School Science and Social Studies. Applied Measurement in Education, 19(2), 151-184.

Clark, J. (2010). Best Practices Research Summary. Sun Associates 2010. Retrieved November 1,

from www.sun-associates.com

Floyd, K. et.al. (2008). Assistive Technology and Emergent Literacy for Preschoolers: A

Literature Review. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 5(1), 92-102.

Gottfried, A. E. (1985). Academic Intrinsic Motivation in Elementary and Junior High School

Students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 631-635.

International Technology Education Association. (© 2003). Advancing Excellence in Technology

Literacy: Student Assessment, Professional Development, and Program Standards. Retrieved October 15, 2011from www.iteawww.org

Kellner, D. (2002). New Media and New Literacies: Restructuring Education for the New

Millennium. Retrieved March 4, 2012 from http://pages.gseis-ucla.edu/faculty/kellner.

Martin, A. J. (2006). The Relation between Teachers’ Perceptions of Student Motivation and

Engagement and Teachers’ Enjoyment of and Confidence in Teaching. Asia-Pacific Journal

of Teacher Education, 34, 73-93.

Mazer, J., Murphy, R., & Simonds, C. (2009). The Effects of Teacher Self-disclosure via Facebook

on Teacher Credibility. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 175-183.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A new

framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record. 108(6), 1017-1054.

Palmer, D. (2005). A Motivational View of Constructivist-Informed Teaching. International

Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 1853-1881.

Richey, R. C., Silber, K. H., & Ely, D. P. (2008). Reflections on the 2008 AECT definitions of the

field. TechTrends, 52(1), 24-25.

Saettler, P. (2004). The Evolution of American Educational Technology. Greenwich, CT:

Information Age Publishing.

Slavin, R. (2003). Educational Psychology, Theory and Practice (7thed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and

Bacon.

st Century Schools – Renewal Education. (© 2010).21st Century Schools. Retrieved October

, 2010 from http://www.21stcenturyschools.com/index.html


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493