4.2 Article

Grounded in What Works: Exemplary Practice in Special Education Teachers' Technology Integration

Journal

JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages 26-38

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0162643416633333

Keywords

resource specialist program; special day class; special education; technology integration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this systematic grounded theory study was to extend the theoretical foundations of the technology acceptance model (TAM) and the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) model to generate a theoretical model explaining the process leading to exemplary integration of technology into special education instructional practice. Data were collected through demographic surveys, interviews, and observations of a purposeful selection of participants. Participants were selected based on exemplary practice criteria determined by an expert focus group. Data were analyzed using open coding, axial coding, and selective coding to gain a categorical understanding of the pedagogy used by special education teachers in successfully integrating technology into teaching and learning. Final analysis revealed a cycle of four components leading to teachers' initial and ongoing technology adoption into classroom activities: (a) opportunities, (b) dispositions, (c) pedagogical beliefs, and (d) small steps. Skill and knowledge levels were salient themes in the process of technology integration. However, underlying these themes were key beliefs and dispositions that proved foundational in leading to exploration and exemplary integration of technology. While obstacles existed, they were ultimately overcome or overlooked due to these key beliefs and dispositions. Implications provide insight into how educators and researchers can improve preservice coursework and professional development for technology integration within special education instruction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available