TEACHER TECHNOLOGY TRAINING
It should be apparent that those who want to (or have to in some cases) teach scholastic journalism and advise student publications have an interest and some experience in instructional technology use. One first year adviser at a Nebraska Class C school made that very clear in the open ended response section of the questionnaire. "…I am a teacher that had some technology experience, but no journalism…but I was able to do the work." Maybe he can teach the technology, but the question remains, can he teach journalism with the technology? All educators should, as the respondents in this survey indicated, be aware that something else will suffer if too much emphasis is placed on the technology and not enough on the specific content area. But, a balance is possible and the potential technology brings to a classroom is limitless. In some cases, journalism teachers by the very nature of their job, cannot be techno-phobic. One 34-year veteran adviser of a Class D school responded that advisers must "Learn it!" and "Like it!" There is no other option. But if the adviser just does not like it and has a fear of getting started, Heinssen (1987) and Rosen, Sears, and Weil (1995a) have described straightforward, proven strategies for eliminating the fear. This is not as simple as it appears. Although technology has become more "user friendly" in the past decade, it may still be quite complex. Rosen and Weil (1995b) offer the following guidelines for the introduction of any technology:
1. The person who is teaching any form of technology must be comfortable with that technology because a techno-phobic teacher will pass these attitudes and feelings to the learner.
2. The person who is teaching technology must be calm, clear, and very open to questions.
3. The teacher should walk the learner through the process of using a technological device first with the learner pushing the buttons. Then the teacher should supervise the learner doing the steps by him/herself.
4. The introduction of technology should be in a non-evaluative atmosphere.
5. It is important to learn about technology by "playing" with it (pp. 4-5).
Teachers must take it upon themselves to become more technologically proficient; no one will do it for them. Many advisers responded that they use their lunches, their plan periods, and their summers to learn the software. Others encouraged attendance at workshops and journalism summer camps with the students. One 14-year adviser in a Class A school realistically encourages new advisers to "seek out those who are comfortable with technology and throw away the manuals." Many advisers also noted that success was found when they recruited technology-talented students. But, in the case of a Class D adviser of only 2 years, "Get help from whoever you can to survive."
In only 30 percent of the schools surveyed for this study, did the school district organize or support effective technology inservice training in the last two years. This seems to greatly contradict the U.S. Department of Education's findings that 78 percent of all public school teachers from all grade levels have participated in professional development activities focused on the integration of educational technology in the last 12 months. The discrepancy in results may be linked to the wording of the survey questions or simply to the thought that journalism teachers use very specific technologies that traditional instructional technology inservices fail to cover effectively. Much of the specific technology training needed by journalism teachers will have to come from outside the school setting. In fact, 40 percent of those surveyed for this study feel that they get more technology support from someone outside of their school. Thirty-three percent were neutral and only 27 percent felt support from inside the school. As an administrator, I would be concerned by this and by the fact that nearly 44 percent of the journalism teachers responding to this survey do not feel their administration understands their technology needs. It should be noted that when listing potential change agents, 31 percent of those surveyed indicated that their school administration was at least partly influential in helping to gain technology.
As Moursund (1999) advocates, when a person decides to become an educator, they make a commitment to lifetime learning. They owe it to themselves, the profession and the students. The 78 percent of the journalism teachers who responded to this survey are on the right track when they have recognized that change must, in many cases, be self-initiated. Good teachers need to challenge themselves first before they even think about challenging their students (Trayes, as quoted first by Phipps, 1998).
AVAILABILITY OF TEACHING/TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
The largest frustration with resources was with that of time. Teaching with technology takes time. There is no way around it. High school journalism teachers in this study were asked to estimate how much time, in minutes, they spent with technology each day. Results were difficult to statistically analyze because of the irregularity of the responses. Many respondents noted that the time varies drastically each day, but at deadline time, a teacher could be using technology more than 12 hours a day with students. Some made notations in the survey response space that it depended on whether or not a disk crashes or whether students saved files correctly. Of those who did note a specific amount of time, and most listed the time in hours, not minutes, the mean average of time spent with technology was at least one and a half hours a day. Except for specific computer programming instructors or staff members in the business office, arguably no other faculty member in a school setting is actively involved with technology so much in a day. The only study reviewed that made an attempt to measure high school teachers and time with technology was Wigmore (1988). Although a dated study, it is of interest in that he studied high school science classrooms and determined that of the teachers who did use a computer in the classroom, the computer was used at an average of 2.6 hours a month, not a day! Wigmore also found that teachers with a master’s degree spent less time with technology than teachers with a bachelor’s degree. An attempt to verify that research was made in this study but no conclusive data were found. Those with a bachelor’s degree averaged two hours a day but the one with a doctorate averaged four hours a day. Those with some graduate courses averaged slightly less than one hour a day and those with a master’s degree averaged two-and-a-half hours a day. The age of the adviser was not clear intervening variable either, but four advisers over the age of 50 responded that they spend four hours or more with technology a day, compared to only two advisers in all the other age categories combined.
Many survey respondents noted that available actual technology resources changed so rapidly that it was impossible to keep up. Some rural school advisers noted that the computer stations available to journalism students were also used by others. "We have many computers and types of software available however it is all being used by others during the journalism hour leaving us with one computer to both a newspaper and annual and to maintain our online presence," explained a Class D adviser. A Class A adviser of 8 years has a similar frustration at the overall lack of technology equipment. "Schools want a first class product with third class equipment," she explained.
Software versions themselves change frequently and staying on top of them is a full time job in itself. Each respondent in this study who identified the software they were using on the questionnaire indicated at least four different applications. This survey did not ask respondents to identify the version of the software they had available. From personal experience, those advisers using one particular yearbook publishing company in Nebraska range from using PageMaker 4.2 to PageMaker 6 and Adobe InDesign, which was not offered as a suggestion or a write-in option in this study questionnaire. The software budget alone could cripple a publication staff if expecting to stay at the leading edge of technology. As anyone with purchasing power understands, software upgrades eventually equate to hardware upgrades and the process is never ending. One Class A adviser of 19 years shared, "Have patience. Even if the school is willing to give you new hardware, but sure you’re also capable of purchasing the updated software — so it will be compatible." Many advisers in this study also recommend shopping for used hardware, not to get ahead, but to attempt to catch up.
Suggestions for Further Research
The scope of this study was narrowly defined. It was not the intent of the researcher to determine how or how often technological innovations were being used by high school journalism students in Nebraska or even if the innovations were being utilized at all. That is the obvious next step for this research. The students themselves could be surveyed or observed in an attempt to determine usage. The advisers could also be re-surveyed and directly asked about their students usage of available innovations. The study of any particular innovation’s use would be interesting in itself. A detailed look at high school students and their use of e-mail or use of word-processing software, could highlight trends and provide useful information for educators. The study could be expanded to look at the diffusion of technological innovations in all curriculum areas and at all grade levels.
The impact of technology at the high school level is another relatively unexplored area of study. It would be interesting, in the journalism area, to do content analysis of high school publications and determine if technology has changed content over the years. Undoubtedly it has changed the process and design capabilities, but has the content remained the same? The impact of technology on the student’s attitudes would be valuable to determine and could be explored with longitudinal studies beginning when a student enters a school system. The studies of technology’s impact could even begin before a subject even reaches school age, because of the current technology infusion into the home. The impact of technology-minded young people entering the workforce could be an extension of this sort of study. The dawn of this new millennium seems prime for at least determining benchmarks for this content area.
Originally, it was thought that this study could determine the innovators among high school journalism advisers in Nebraska, but the inventory questions on the survey asking for approximate date of acquisition were interestingly difficult to answer. One survey respondent did note items back to 1980 (when the classroom first acquired a SLR camera) but many filled in the category with question marks. It was interesting to discover that some advisers acquired technological innovations "last week" or will do so "by the end of this year." This area of research could also be explored further. By identifying the advisers who have been in the classroom for at least 20 years (10 of the respondents) or some other arbitrary number, detailed interviews or survey instruments could be developed to determine more accurate pictures of the process of innovation acquisition, the motivation and patterns behind the adoption behavior.
Although the concepts of diffusion and innovation were applied to frame this study, the researcher questions if this theory is the most appropriate. Given the rapid rate of technological change, one could question if innovations can still be classified as they once were. Are the innovations used in the classrooms of today really "new" by Rogers standards? Innovations of today may be faster or sleeker or more economical, but are they fundamentally different or "new" when students are introduced to them in their earliest memories. Rogers may need to reconsider the "S" shaped curve to describe more fully what happens after an innovation has been completely diffused. Even if diffusion is not an appropriate theory, this study itself can serve a distinct purpose if repeated over time. The inventory data on high school journalism classrooms in Nebraska can provide a benchmark for future study or be a springboard for related studies with other populations.
Limitations of the Study
As with all research, this study has certain limitations. The study’s sample is limited to respondents who are members of the Nebraska High School Press Association, a division within the Nebraska State Activities Association. A high school journalism adviser does not have to be member of this organization to teach journalism in the state. The $45 membership fee for the organization enables the students to participate in state conventions, contests and workshops. Taking the initiative to join the organization already limits the sample. In many cases, the registration is the job of the athletic director in a school system who must register in the same manner for each sanctioned sport. Because of the limited population sample, it is not intended to generalize the results to the larger educational system or even scholastic journalism advisers as a collective group, however the findings provide references for technologists, teachers, administrators and students in higher education.
Further, while an effort was made to examine non-response bias, there is always the possibility that the data are systematically biased. The methodology adopted for this study also presents certain constraints. Cross-sectional studies such as this do not fully capture the complexity of the technology adoption process. As has been mentioned throughout this study, just because an adviser said his or her students have access to a certain innovation does not mean they are using it at all or using it in the same way as students in another school system. Each technology user will use the innovation to suit their immediate needs, often with a limited understanding of the potential being overlooked. The researcher also assumes that the respondents were telling the truth in their questionnaire responses. No testing of external or internal validity could be confirmed if respondents did not accurately inventory their classroom technologies.
Additionally, perceptions and attitudes are not static. As a result, a cross-sectional study like this does not capture the complexity of the adoption process. Therefore, results of this study should be viewed as exploratory and preliminary.
Conclusion
This research study was conducted to explore the diffusion status of educational technologies or innovations in the high school journalism classrooms of Nebraska and to explore the high school journalism adviser’s perceptions of technology in the classroom. Another goal of this study was to document successful technology-gaining strategies of technology-using educators. All three of these goals have been achieved by the review of relevant literature pertaining to diffusion theory, the function of change agents, technology in education and technology in journalism careers and through the instrumentation of a statewide questionnaire to high school journalism teachers. One- hundred questionnaires were mailed to high school journalism advisers who were members of the Nebraska High School Press Association and 55 valid responses were returned by the study completion date for a response rate of 55 percent. With such a limited sampling, the data analysis, conducted with the aid of the SPSS statistical analysis software, is certainly not conclusive, but exploratory.
Four general research questions were identified and descriptive answers were formulated. Research Question One asked: What technological innovations are currently available for use in high school journalism classrooms across the state of Nebraska? The complete responses to the questionnaire’s technology inventory are detailed in Tables 1 and 2 of Chapter 4. Hardware innovations that are almost completely diffused in to the journalism classroom situations of those Nebraska high school journalism adviser respondents were: computers, Internet connection, VCRs, overhead projectors, laser printers, CDRom players and camcorders. School size and school location were found to be determining factors for technology availability with a few innovations.
Research Question Two asked: How do high school journalism teachers advisers in Nebraska perceive technology? Perceptions were measured by analyzing scaled items and open-ended responses on the study questionnaire. It seems that Nebraska high school journalism teachers feel that technology makes them better teachers. Many (86 percent) of those in the sample are comfortable using technology in the classroom, but only a discouraging 45.5 percent of those in the sample feel that they can effectively demonstrate the use of the technologies available to their students. Fully 87 percent of those in the sample indicated that they would like more technology knowledge and general skills. Demographic variables did not significantly effect these perceptions.
Research Question Three asked: What are the successful methods of bringing technology into the journalism classroom? Through a synthesis of open ended responses, five key strategies were identified: 1) Prove the value of the innovation/technology; 2) Be vocal about the need to adopt the innovation/technology; 3) Be persistent; 4) Involve students in the process; and 5) Actively search for outside/additional funding. The entire list of responses is included in Appendix E.
Research Question Four asked: Who is functioning as a change agent for Nebraska journalism advisers? The most effective agent of change for 78 percent of those Nebraska high school journalism advisers in this sample was the adviser him/her self. Technology coordinators or their equivalent within a school system were cited in 53 percent of the responses and the administration was cited 31 percent, just slightly ahead of the students themselves at 29 percent.
In summary, the analysis describes the diffusion status of the availability of technological innovations in the high school journalism settings of Nebraska, describes the average journalism adviser and his/her perceptions of technology, describes strategies for successfully acquiring technology and identifies the common agents of change.
As educators and as journalists, the legal, ethical and societal effects of technology must continue to be explored. We have an obligation to ensure that our students understand that technology has the potential for improving the life of individuals and serving the societal public good in an almost unlimited variety of ways. High school journalism teachers must move well beyond worries relative to getting the student newspaper or yearbook published on time, they must advocate a critical study of the impact of the mass media and new technologies.
Seconding what Pattison, (1995) wrote for Quill, using what technology is available is all about control. Some of us have fallen in love (or lust - as he says) with the power of Macs, Quark and Adobe Photoshop. Rather than reduce workload, technology often increases the workload. Fascination with technology can go too far, journalism may become more about the production process on your desktop than about journalism itself. But we must keep in mind that it’s still all about the craft, the art of storytelling, even if technology has shortened the deadline to milliseconds. To paraphrase Allison Davis (as quoted by Lord, 1995), we can always teach HTML (hypertext markup language) to a journalist, but we can’t teach a techie to how to tell a story. But as Simon and Napolitano (1999) report, we can be reasonably certain that the future belongs to reporters who become more and more computer literate. But, we cannot forget, as Martinson, (1998) reminds journalism teachers, a vast majority of our students will never work for a newspaper or broadcasting outlet. Each and every one, however, will be the recipient of messages emanating from an increasingly technologically sophisticated communication industry.
As Cuban (1999) writes, the essence of teaching is a knowledgeable, caring adult building a relationship with one or more students to help them learn what the teacher, the community and the parents believe to be important. Technology changes that relationship. "Teachers’ beliefs about their authority, control of their students--their very role--come into sharp focus when they are asked to use software that would seem to replace what the teacher has traditionally done. While some teachers find this exhilarating and rush to accommodate the change in classroom relationships, many pause to consider the gains and losses to them and their students." There needs to be more debate over traditional education values and the need to accelerate at the speed of light in technology. Technologies change too quickly to stay current in all areas of development.
But this cannot be a deterrent, it must be a catalyst.
