Fonte_AR Final Final Draft 6-23-2014

Running head: EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIPS, & iPADS 1

The Use of iPads in the Catholic Classroom to Foster Relationships and Enhance Learning

Nicholas Fonte

University of Notre Dame

Pope John Paul the Great Catholic High School

EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIPS, & iPADS

Abstract

The mission of every Catholic school is the salvation of souls. As modern technology has been

consistently integrated into Catholic schools, especially 1:1 plans in which each student has a

computing device, what role does this technology play in the mission of the schools? Made like

God, and thus made for relationships, how has technology affected the relationships in the school

communities? The faculty and staff of four schools were surveyed and interviewed about the

successes and challenges in their 1:1 programs. The research found that iPads were used

primarily as a tool in the classroom, like any other resource, and taking the average, the use of

the iPads was occasional. The iPads caused some problems, such as distractions, and also

increased the communication between teachers and students. Survey responses suggested little

connection of the program to the mission of the Catholic schools. Yet, interestingly, teachers

perceived generally an improvement in teacher / student relationships with the implementation of

the 1:1 iPad program. Overall, the research suggested that the phenomenon of 1:1 iPad programs

is too young to make definitive statements on its merits and problems. In order to determine the

best methods of using this technology in order to further the mission of Catholic school, it is

recommended that many case studies of individual schools be conducted in order to closely

examine relationships in the 1:1 school environment. With time, longitudinal studies will also

help to link the purpose of education, the sanctification and salvation of souls, with the “how” of

using a 1:1 iPad program in a Catholic school.

2


The Use of iPads in the Catholic Classroom to Build Relationships and Enhance Learning

“Yes, they are much more lonely and depressed.” In the summer of 2012 I had a

conversation with a campus minister at the University of Notre Dame who had served for 15

years. I graduated from the university before the universal use of email, cell phones, texting, and

social networking websites. When I was a student, every dorm room had a telephone. At some

point in the years since my undergraduate attendance, every phone was removed; they were no

longer necessary. As the campus minister and I were discussing the changes that had occurred at

Notre Dame, I asked: “Has there been an increase in student depression since the sudden change

in communication among the students at Notre Dame?” I already wrote her response. A year

later a Notre Dame professor told me that the University Counseling Center had doubled in size

in the past 15 years.

Granted, other factors beyond modern technology account for the campus minister’s

experience with students, but the indiscriminate, detached, and superficial use of modern

technology is a contributing factor (Terkle, 2011). This realization leads many to suggest that

significantly limiting the use of laptops, digital music devices, smartphones, and tablets will once

again create the context necessary for adolescents to foster relationships. This claim holds some

veracity, but this technology is here to stay, and Catholics are called to be faithful to reality

(Lynch & Borras, 2012). This fidelity provides an alternative to a Luddite-like response. With

the pervasive and lasting presence of technology in mind, why cannot adults learn to use this

technology with adolescents in such a way that it creates authentic relationships not only

between the two generations, but also among the adolescents themselves? Many studies provide

conflicting responses to this question. Yet we must learn to live the true, the good, and the

beautiful in the concrete circumstances of our lives, which includes the universal presence of

3


modern technology. An ideal place for this education to take place is in Catholic high schools,

for this environment can develop curricula, not only to teach students how to use technology

healthily, but also to use it to enhance student learning in all disciplines, always rooted in the

living the Christian mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation.

Pope John Paul the Great Catholic High School (JP) is one of these ideal places. It

provides a prime context for teachers to engage in this educational endeavor. Only six years old

and housed within a $60 million new building, JP has a mission-driven faculty and staff that

actively seek to live in communion with Christ and nurture a culture in which its students can

encounter him every day. The mission of JP is the mission of the Holy Catholic Church: the

sanctification and salvation of souls; the school embraces the truth humanity can be blessed with

the mercy of salvation only in a relationship with God. Through the Incarnation, Jesus taught the

world that education happens in the context of relationships; he is Divine Revelation, not merely

the source of it (Paul VI, 1965). Thus, in a Catholic school, true education is not just the

revealing and understanding of truths; rather, it is wholly identified with the person of Jesus

Christ. The adults at JP work to live the truth of education with their students, and in addition to

JP’s focus on relationships, it also has the infrastructure and means to integrate modern

technology, specifically, the iPad, into its pedagogy. The nation has seen many schools introduce

the iPad into classrooms, yet with mixed results. Poor outcomes do not suffice. If technological

tools are not implemented healthily, Christians will suffer a high risk of losing their children.

They can easily disappear into our impatient world, focused on the virtual and detached from

reality. It is becoming increasingly dependent on the Internet and mobile devices, such as the

iPad, for human relationships. Alone, children are not learning to use this technology

responsibly, and as noted, the effects sometimes negatively impact their wellbeing. Yet this risk

4


may be mitigated; JP possesses the culture in which a proper implementation of the iPad will

counter the breakdown of relationships and enhance student learning. With JP’s mission in

mind, the following two questions arise in order of their primacy: what will JP use the iPad to

do? Then, how will the school implement the iPad in an effective, mission-oriented plan in JP’s

educational environment? When successful, such a plan designed for JP, can be modified to

meet the circumstances of Catholic schools across the country.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this action research was to develop an effective technology plan in which

every student has an iPad (1:1 Plan) at JP. An effective plan would foster interpersonal

relationships and enhance student learning.

Research Questions

The major research questions considered in this action research project were:

1. How have other Catholic schools implemented the use of iPads in the classroom in

order to improve student learning?

2. How has the introduction of iPads in other Catholic schools affected relationships and

community?

3. What are the best methods for the initial implementation of iPads at JP that will best

serve its mission?

Literature Review

Imagine the reality of using technology both to develop face-to-face in person

relationships and enhance learning in the classroom at the same time. This reality can be real.

Today, there exists an abundance of studies and criticism that conclude the use of modern

technology is isolating individuals and preventing healthy, substantial relationships. Such

5


criticism is true, but the sudden and rampant indiscriminate use of technology does not have to

define the culture in which we educate our children. Mission-driven people throughout the

world have studied how it is possible and have worked to better integrate technology in

classroom without sacrificing the true experience of education: the face-to-face encounter

between teacher and pupil. The Catholic Church has offered principles to follow in the use of

technology that will yield fruit instead of inflict damage on its users.

The Church has always acknowledged the primacy of relationships, and Catholic school

education is no exception. Made from God, for God, and like God human beings have been

given the beautiful call to live always in relationship with each other, and the Catholic school is

meant to respond to this call. When the explosion of technology use in schools happened,

Catholic schools responded in various ways. Some purchased technology for the sake of having

technology, others purchased it, recognizing its potential, but lacked an effective strategy for its

implementation, and some Catholic schools rejected it out of fear. This history, however, does

not exhaust the responses to technology or force educators to accept the often wild ideas about

how it is going to revolutionize education (Collins & Halverson, 2009). God is working in the

concrete circumstances of this cultural technological shift, and Catholic schools today can rely

on the Church’s teaching, research, and Catholic schools’ past experiences. These resources will

help Catholic schools to develop a conscious plan to take what is good from technology

(Benedict XVI, 2010), protect themselves from the possible negative effects of its presence, and

move toward being a modern Catholic school that does not compromise the Christ-given truth

and culture of education.

Forms of technology for the classroom abound, but given the circumstances of software

available and the unique situation at JP, this action research project will best serve JP by

6


focusing on the use of Apple’s iPad in the school’s learning environment, but also not ignoring

other 1:1 plans that use other devices. First, Apple has made significant advances in its

educational resources for schools via the iPad, and arguably, possesses the best hardware and

educational software for the school setting. Additionally, the fact that JP already uses iPads in its

Options program, which supports children with significant disabilities, and the presence of

informal dialogue about exploring the use of iPads in the classroom, I will focus primarily on the

research and use of the iPad in Catholic schools.

Education and personal relationships. St. Cecilia Academy, a high school in

Nashville, Tennessee, has created a school culture that uses technology based on human

relationships and research conducted on how technology can be used to support human

relationships. The high school has shown that technology can advance the educational process

and foster growth of the whole person. It has supported relationships, and consequently, the

school has created a learning community, which is “the proven factor of greatest impact on

student learning” (St. Cecilia Academy, 2012, p. 1). The high school has yet to implement a 1:1

iPad plan, but it offers the paradigm of the use of technology in a structured, Christ-centered, and

relationship-based learning environment. It will be useful to explore why and how St. Cecilia

Academy developed this statement of technology use.

An important point of departure begins with a brief discussion of what the Catholic

Church teaches about education and relationships in the Catholic school. The first document

published by the Congregation for Catholic Education (CCE), Gravissimum educationis (1965),

declared that the primary purpose of Christian education is:

That the baptized, while they are gradually introduced to the knowledge of the mystery of

salvation, become ever more aware of the gift of Faith they have received, and that they

7


learn in addition how to worship God the Father in spirit and truth (cf. John 4:23)

especially in liturgical action … [and that they] strive for the growth of the Mystical

Body. (para. 2)

Over the past 50 years the Church has expounded upon the purpose of Christian education,

rooted in the depths of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, always focusing on the fact that

God is a Communion of Persons and the Son was incarnate to restore man’s relationship with the

God. The Catholic school, which embodies Catholic education and the Church’s mission, must

be a community of both students and adults that is ever rediscovering their living relationship

with Christ. Moreover, the Church’s mission is lived out through Catholic education as students

strive to grow closer to all of humanity through evangelization (CCE, 1977).

Education begins within a community. The Catholic school is the meeting place where

its work seeks to promote a faith-relationship with Christ, and this relationship can occur only

through a living encounter with him. A Catholic school realizes this fulfilling encounter by

taking the form of personal contacts and commitments, undergirded by the absolute value of life.

These frequent encounters with Christ give the work of education everything that is necessary

“and thus ‘creates in the school community an atmosphere permeated with the Gospel spirit of

freedom and love’” (Paul VI, 1965, para. 5). Inculcated in this culture, students can live out the

implications of their destiny, becoming a person who talks consciously with God.

Communities of education are grounded in the educators who serve within the walls of a

school. It must be directly stated that true education is not limited to the imparting of

knowledge, nor is its purpose to gain power; rather “it promotes human dignity and genuine

human relationships, and prepares the way for opening oneself to the Truth that is Christ” (CCE,

1977, para. 55). This opening, in turn, aids students “towards a fuller understanding of, and

8


communion with man, events and things” (CCE, 2007, para. 39). Educators must reveal that man

is called to participate in Trinitarian communion, which changes human relationships and creates

deeper solidarity (CCE, 2002).

As we recognize the role of educators, it becomes clear that teachers cannot be replaced

with iPads, nor should iPads create distance between the teacher and students, for educators are

called to “accomplish the very purpose of evangelization: the incarnation of the Christian

message in the lives of men and women” (CCE, 1982, para. 31). Therefore, teachers must live as

concrete witnesses of the truth and students should be able to recognize easily the Christian

attitude of their teachers. The Church document Lay Catholics in Schools (1982) aptly stressed

the importance of relationships in education:

In this context, what was said above about direct and personal contact between teachers

and students becomes especially significant: it is a privileged opportunity for giving

witness. A personal relationship is always a dialogue rather than a monologue, and the

teacher must be convinced that the enrichment in the relationship is mutual. But the

mission must never be lost sight of: the educator can never forget that students need a

companion and guide during their period of growth; they need help from others in order

to overcome doubts and disorientation. Also, rapport with the students ought to be a

prudent combination of familiarity and distance; and this must be adapted to the need of

each individual student. Familiarity will make a personal relationship easier, but a certain

distance is also needed: students need to learn how to express their own personality

without being pre-conditioned; they need to be freed from inhibitions in the responsible

exercise of their freedom. … This direct and personal contact is not just a methodology

by which the teacher can help in the formation of the students; it is also the means by

9


which teachers learn what they need to know about the students in order to guide them

adequately. The difference in generation is deeper, and the time between generations is

shorter, today more than ever before; direct contact, then, is more necessary than ever.

(para. 33)

If a Catholic school lacks these personal relationships, there is little left that will make the school

Catholic.

As educators create this unique Christian school climate, which is held together by

healthy interpersonal relationships, students begin to mature in their understanding of the depths

of the meaning of “person.” A person has been gifted the capacity to be an active and creative

subject “capable of interpersonal relationships, called to a specific mission in the world” (CCE,

1988, para. 55). A human being experiences the call and strong desire to be in communion

because of his nature, which is created in the image and likeness of God. A true anthropology

reveals that “man is not an isolated individual, but a person: a being who is essentially relational.

The communion to which man is called always involves a double dimension, that is to say

vertical (communion with God) and horizontal (communion with people)” (CCE, 2007, para. 8).

God is love, and made in this image, human beings realize and experience this love in a body and

soul unity by opening up to relationships with others (CCE, 2007).

Once students begin and continue to grow in the ongoing, lifelong experience of living

life, it becomes apparent that education is not knowledge for the sake of knowledge nor for the

appropriation of power; rather, they see it as a means to communion, and thus as a call to serve

and accept responsibility for others. Students experience themselves as a part of wider social

communities with greater awareness, and recognize the world’s desperate need for the light and

joy of fully human relationships. Many people in the world live a popular independent lifestyle,

10


some live homeless, some in the cold, oversized, and impersonal houses of the rich, all of which

leads to loneliness. Not only do students see the pervasive poverty of loneliness in the world, but

they will echo what the campus minister said and what the Church has recognized: “Young

people today are notably more depressed than in the past; this is surely a sign of the poverty of

human relationships in families and in society today” (CCE, 1988, para. 11).

Thus education cannot be separated from interpersonal relationships in Catholic schools,

like it has in many ways throughout the world. Catholic education must move into the

technologically advanced 21st century as a beacon of communion and the remedy for loneliness

caused in great part by the fact that persons are becoming increasingly isolated as they try to

engage reality through computers, the internet, social networking websites, text messaging, and

the constant electronic game playing through mobile devices, including the iPad.

Technology and personal relationships. The purpose of Catholic schools will never

change, for it is the mission of the Catholic Church: the sanctification and salvation of souls; and

this mission will remain true until the end of time. Modern technology has created a myriad of

new pedagogical approaches in schools today, yet one must always have in mind that true

education will occur only within the context of a community of strong interpersonal relationships

with constant direct interaction between educators and students. This fact does not condemn

technology, for Catholic schools teach children to think with the Church and to judge reality

well, they will come to see the value and dangers in modern technology in the 21st century.

God always speaks to us through the specific situations in which we live, and he placed

us in the context of a culture in which advanced technology’s presence is so pervasive that the

Vatican uses it regularly to reach many people that it never could have 30 years ago.

11


Technology offers the opportunity to help students grow in their understanding of the faith, and

in doing so, they will better live a Trinitarian life in the mystery of Love.

Moreover, Nuzzi (2010) referenced Greinacher who states that an integral part of living

one’s Catholic identity is “being bound in familial ties with Catholics throughout the world” (p.

11). Technology cannot be the exclusive means in developing such ties, but it can play a role,

and in an age in which the Catholic identity of many schools in the United States is questioned,

the prevalence of technology may be of greater importance in this outreach to brothers and

sisters throughout the world. Authentically Catholic schools, which allow the Lord to reveal a

culture of communion, require a theology of Catholic administration (Nuzzi, 2012), and

theology, as lofty as some may consider it, must be grounded in reality; and our reality is that we

exist in societal structures that require the use of technology in order to be engaged with

Catholics and non-Catholics alike. We thus have the obligation to explore how a Catholic school

administration will live out its mission both theologically informed and aware of technology.

The proliferation and use of modern technology’s deleterious effects on interpersonal

relationships cannot be overstated. Several authors have explored what it has been like for this

generation to grow up with social networks and online communities; Strom (2012) conducted a

statistical analysis in order to take an in depth look at the dark side of Internet communication.

The Internet has created a forum for bullying in which the bully feels he can attack others with

impunity, and it has created the ability to communicate with a much greater number of people,

resulting in less time to build intimate and durable relationships. The average user of Facebook

has 130 “friends,” and conversations with this network of people detract from face-to-face

interaction, which we already have shown is crucial to personal growth.

12


Terkle (2011) also studied how technology has negatively changed the way people view

themselves and their relationships; the study suggested that social networking has reinvented

intimacy and solitude, blurring the lines between them and giving individuals the ability to

control their relationships. Texting and Facebook allow teenagers to avoid vulnerability. After

interviewing many teenagers and college students, Terkle concluded that technology “is not just

doing things for us, but to us, changing the way we view ourselves and our relationships”

(Terkle, 2011, p. 28). Children, teenagers, and adults now email, social network, tweet, post on

Facebook, and send text messages so often that people tend to feel anxiety when they do not

have their mobile device in their possession. Yet in the midst of all this communication, people

are lonely:

Often, our new digital connections offer the illusion of companionship without the

demands of friendship. We become accustomed to connection at a distance and in

amounts we can control. Teenagers say they would rather text than talk. Like Goldilocks

—not too close, not too far, just right. In other words, we become accustomed to

connection made to measure: the ability to hide from each other even as we are

constantly connected to each other. (Terkle, 2011, p. 29)

Current teenagers grew up in this age of distraction and they do not know differently. In

fact, as they are growing up, they have to compete with their parents’ mobile devices for

attention. So, they, too, turn to the Internet to satisfy their craving for friendship and defeat

loneliness; yet after hours of connectivity via technology, they often find themselves isolated.

Perplexed and ignorant, they continue to rely on non-committal, tenuous relationships with

strangers (Terkle, 2011).

13


Research conducted by van der Laan (2012) provided a more focused look at the claims

made by Terkle. Van der Laan’s work looked at the effects of modern technology on human

language, and the results support Terkle’s claims. In his own words, van der Laan concluded

that human language is conforming to technological structures, and language invariable changes

people’s thinking, relationships, and freedom (van der Laan, 2012).

The researcher noted that technology is now beyond our control, and it controls the

modalities of our existence (van der Laan, 2012). No longer is technology a mere collection of

tools that may be freely used according to the will of a person. Instead, technology today is “a

total ideological and pragmatic system which imposes structure, institutions, and modes of

behavior on all members of a society” (van der Laan, 2012, p. 242). Technological innovations

now force societies to conform to them, and therefore, they shape our behavior, our language,

and our thought. With regard to education specifically, van der Laan found that literacy rates

and scores on standardized tests have drastically dropped in the last two decades, and language

now must conform to the fundamental principle of technology, which is efficiency. This need

condenses vocabulary and syntax, and it reduces the amount of words used in order to provide

for efficient communication. Clearly, the effects have reached the classroom. Instead of writing

essays and reports, students often are required to produce PowerPoints, using fewer words and

focusing instead on images, and this shift is reinforced as teachers their use of PowerPoint as a

primary medium of education (van der Laan, 2012).

These two studies, as well as others, compete with other studies that claim positive

relational and educational results from using technology in the classroom. Costabile (2012)

studied 28 countries through a lens of psychology and concluding that technology, when used

well, promotes positive peer interactions. Costabile also showed that, in a technology-laden

14


world, students need to become good digital citizens, and the use of technology in the classroom

has proven effective in this regard.

The presence of technology does not have to cause substantial changes to the already

present relationships between a teacher and students. Yen (2012) conducted a study within the

context of technology, and he notes that teacher engagement was an effective predictor of learner

satisfaction. This correlation exists with or without the presence of technology. Testing teacher

engagement across three modes of learning delivery: face-to-face, satellite broadcast, and live

video streaming, he found that the type of learning delivery mode did not affect the positive

correlation of faculty involvement and student satisfaction. The point is that in many cases

technology may not directly enhance teacher-student relationships, but its presence does not have

to take away from them if it is used wisely.

In 1991, before the Internet, cell phones, and mobile devices were available for

widespread use in schools or the world, Frick proposed a theory of implementing technology in

the classroom that suggested a change in relationships between students and teachers. The

change would have a negative impact, but the positive impact would significantly outweigh what

would be lost. Before he explored the possibilities of the implementation, he first provided a

general overview of the current practices in schools at the time, which is largely still accurate

today. Generally, teachers present information orally and visually to groups of students, and the

assignments typically are the same for the majority of the class. Student work is graded, and the

teacher provides feedback. When the teacher does not directly instruct, he or she supervises

small group work and is able to attend to the specific questions and progress of each group; and

whether they are in small groups or gathered as a class, the teacher will answer questions and

stimulate dialogue in the class as a whole. Lastly, individualized instruction, or what today is

15


called differentiated instruction, is rarely used due to the significant amount of time it requires

under the current classroom conditions (Frick, 1991).

Once he made this evaluation, he posited that the introduction of electronic information

technologies would cause several basic changes. Students would be receiving instruction from a

variety of sources, which would provide feedback and assessments. He acknowledged that this

approach would diminish the amount of face-to-face interaction with the classroom as a whole,

but it has the potential to increase one-on-one, personal relationships between the teacher and the

individual students. He claimed that the teacher would be freed from the role of information

provider to larger groups, and would be able to spend more time overseeing and interacting with

individual students, guiding them and providing them with insight that the technology itself

cannot offer. Also, “the executive teacher [the human teacher] might also have more time to get

to know students personally and listen to what is on their minds” (Frick, 1991, p. 21). Frick

provided an interesting theory, and now that these “electronic information technologies” have

been placed in schools, current research must continue to take up these questions, either

supporting or rejecting his propositions.

The available research notes significant negative effects of the use of modern technology;

yet other studies have found that it can be used in the classroom without detracting from student

learning. Moreover, the Vatican has published at least 62 documents that have discussed to a

greater or lesser extent the value of technology from 1955 to present. In all these documents, the

Church has noted both positive and negative effects of modern technology in the world, e.g., The

Ideal Film by Pope Pius XII in 1955, Social Communications and the Family by Pope Paul VI in

1969, and Internet: A New Forum for Proclaiming the Gospel by Blessed John Paul II in 2002.

With the gift of Church guidance, Catholic schools can proceed cautiously, then, as they work to

16


establish the healthy use of technology in the classroom. Catholic schools need not reject

modern technology, yet they must make decisions prudently.

In his book, Infinite Bandwidth: Encountering Christ in the Media, Gan (2010) sifted

through all of the Church documents relevant to the discussion of modern technology, and he

extracted seven important factors that Catholics must take into account as they engage

technology. First, he describes the first factor, balance, as the one that serves as the foundation

for all others. This factor requires man to analyze media from all angles and himself in the

process. This analysis will develop a healthy habit of using technology when a person can

consider the persons, place, time, and any other conditions necessary in order to ensure the

fruitful use of it. Second, Catholics must possess strong attitude awareness, for what we see

affects us. It will help us to keep up our guard and maintain a critical perspective of what we

consume via technological media. Third, Catholics can never forget the dignity of the human

person; Gan cited St. John Paul II and stated that the goal of all technological progress is for man

to become more human. Created in God’s image, the Church must ask whether certain use of

technology will help us to grow in holiness, to become more human, to become more like God.

Fourth, the technology used must always communicate truth. Fifth, it must inspire humanity and

help individuals to be true to their transcendent destiny. Sixth, in a sense technology bears the

mark of a work of art in that its beauty and goodness involves skill in its development. In short,

the technology must be well crafted. Lastly, healthy use of technology requires that it be

relevant to human experience, and true human experience is incarnational, rooted in the realities

of the world in which we live (Gan, 2010).

These principles provide the grounds to assess when and how technology should be used,

but we must go deeper than Gan’s assessment of media, for while he accurately distills key

17


principles that ought to be followed in the use of technology, he makes a crucial and common

error in believing that all technology is neutral. He contends that how we engage it is the only

consideration that matters. Technology is not neutral, however, and secular studies have

confirmed this fact. Returning to the study conducted by Terkle, the author provided clear

evidence that technology “is not just doing things for us, but to us…” (Terkle, 2011, p. 28).

Brain research has shown that the modern means of communication have changed how our

brains develop. For example, Ives (2012) discovered that the introduction of modern technology

to teens and adults quickly causes development of a digital literacy: immediate comprehension of

incomplete sentences with many new words. At the same time, the change in the brain that

allows this new digital literacy also diminishes ‘traditional’ literacy; it becomes more difficult

for them to comprehend long pieces of writing. In another study, Carr (2011) showed that

modern technology forms the brain to manage effectively high amounts of simultaneous stimuli

by making constant, rapid decisions on what a person gives his or her attention. In turn,

however, the brain develops an addiction to these stimuli, making it very difficult for individuals

to focus their attention on one thing for more than a few minutes. Scientists have proven brain

plasticity in many areas of research; in short, our brains, and thus our abilities, can change easily.

The circumstances of our environment and how we behave cause neurons to fire differently and

make stronger or weaker connections. The study of stroke victims has provided a well-known

example of brain plasticity. In the brain of a stroke victim, undamaged portions of the brain

change in order to compensate for the damaged portions, hence a survivor’s ability to learn to

walk and speak again (Lynch & Borras, 2012). In lesser known studies, researchers have shown

that how we read a book and how we take in information on the Internet affects our brains

18


differently, and the brain will change according to the means in which we imbibe content (Lynch

& Borras, 2012).

Therefore, contrary to what many argue, modern technology is not neutral. This

statement does not imply that it is intrinsically evil, but we will lack sufficient criteria for

determining the healthy use of technology in Catholic schools, if we consider the iPad to be a

neutral object. To make this claim reduces the implications of iPad use in a school to merely

answering the question: how is it used? The answer to this question is vital, and it was the

primary purpose that this research was conducted, but the assumption of neutrality leaves one to

think that the appropriate use of an iPad in education can be determined solely by considering

how we use it. While we use technology, “it is also the technology that ‘uses’ its user. Every

tool has an impact on the person using it. In that sense, tools are not neutral” (Lynch & Borras,

2012, pp. 8-9).

The import of technology’s lack of neutrality becomes of significant interest when

considering the purpose and the means of Catholic education: the sanctification and salvation of

souls through personal relationships between human beings. Again, human beings are a body and

soul unity. When the Son of God took on human flesh and entered into physical face-to-face

relationships with others, especially his 12 Apostles, he gave humanity the example of true

pedagogy. As stated above, all Christian life rests on two principal mysteries: the Holy Trinity

and the Incarnation. Therefore, neither can be absent in education. The Trinity explains our

profound desire and need of relationships, and the Incarnation reveals the importance of the

body; the body is the home of relationships, for without my body, I cannot interact with the

created world. In a sense, not only should I say that I have a body, but also that I am my body.

As beings made for love, personal relationships grow through personal communication, and the

19


majority of how we communicate with each other is through physical body language. Lynch and

Borras recognized these facts and stated that within the realm of education and evangelization,

we must go deeper than the question of how to use technology: “I will propose we ask first of all

what we wish to do or say through technology, in order to be conscious of the gains and losses

incurred through its use” (2012, p. 8).

We can conclude that our experiences shape who we are, and Lynch and Borras

corroborated:

We become what we think, what we see, what we read, and what we do. This is not a

mystical affirmation; on a neurological level, our experiences never leave us unchanged.

They modify us, for better and for worse, creating or strengthening new connections in

our brains, weakening or eliminating others, forming us in the image of our actions,

thoughts, desires, and tools. If there is a two-way relationship between a tool and its user,

between man and technology, which are the tools we would most like to resemble?

Reading the Scripture creates a powerful capacity for reasoning and an attention to subtle

detail that man does not naturally have. It can only be acquired by long experience, and

by the decision to concentrate on certain types of reading. Meditating on the lives of the

Saints helps us to form our will and our intelligence to the highest standards. Good moral

action creates virtuous habits. In other words, all of the above actions partially rewire our

brains in the image of those same actions. (2012, p. 11-12)

Pope Benedict XVI supported Lynch’s statement by posing questions at the 2011 International

Day of Social Communications:

Who is my ‘neighbor’ in this new world? Does the danger exist that we may be less

present to those whom we encounter in our everyday life? Is there is a risk of being more

20


distracted because our attention is fragmented and absorbed in a world ‘other’ than the

one in which we live? Do we have time to reflect critically on our choices and to foster

human relationships which are truly deep and lasting? It is important always to remember

that virtual contact cannot and must not take the place of direct human contact with

people at every level of our lives. (Benedict XVI, 2011)

Pope Benedict XVI rooted his speech above in his Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini:

The virtual world will never be able to replace the real world, and … evangelization will

be able to make use of the virtual world offered by the new media in order to create

meaningful relationships only if it is able to offer the personal contact which remains

indispensable. (Benediction XVI, 2010)

Simply put, the awareness of technology’s lack of neutrality helped to begin the

development of a 1:1 iPad plan after researching how it was implemented in other Catholic high

schools and what its effects were on the community.

The effects of modern technology on learning. Ample research has become available in

the past couple of years on the successful and poor methods of using technology in order to

improve student learning. Longitudinal studies have evaluated numerous variables and have

begun to discover the role that technology can play in student learning. Those schools that

immediately embraced the rapid technological advances now have suggestions, which were

developed from their trial and error, for other schools. One peer-reviewed article by Bielefeldt

(2012) is simply titled “Guidance for Technology Decisions from Classroom Observation.” In

this article, Bielefeldt reported the results of a study that evaluated the effectiveness of

technology in 144 classrooms over the course of two years. The findings showed that the

average student-use of technology was double that of teacher-use, and it found a negative

21


correlation between student-use and teacher-use. The more teachers used technology, the less

time students used it. The study found that there was higher student engagement in lessons when

they used technology and the student engagement decreased when teachers used the technology.

It could not determine, however, whether the technology was necessary for the classroom,

because lesson plans appeared to be designed in anticipation of technology use.

Nevertheless, the study found that planning a technology based lesson was more difficult

than executing it, yet the causes of this finding could not be determined. One possible factor was

a teacher’s experience with the technology, for the study found that when a teacher used an

interactive whiteboard, which tends to be more teacher focused, he or she was able to increase

student engagement based on the years of experience with the technology. The study made it

clear, however, that if technology is going to be used in the classroom, student engagement is

much higher when the students interact with it more than when the teachers do.

The Bielefeldt study observed a crucial finding that administrators must consider when

using technology in the classroom. He found that “there seems to be a path of least resistance

with any technology” (2012, p. 220). Different forms of technology have specific purposes and

to use them in alternate ways has proven to require the time and energy of teachers. Educators

must remain focused on their priorities, for a technology implemented in order to attend to one

need may have unexpected, challenging consequences (2012). The study recommended that

these competing interests in the different forms of technology in the classroom be taken into

account.

In another study, Jeffries (2007) explored the relationship between pedagogy, ethics, and

technology in order to develop an e-learning strategy. Jeffries attempted to infuse these three

important aspects, because while each had been treated separately in other studies of using

22


technology in the classroom, all three had not been considered together, thus there was a gap in

understanding their mutual influences. He sought to close this gap and provide a conceptual

framework in order to see the relationships between all three (Jeffries, 2007). The framework he

developed recommended that educators consider first their philosophical assumptions of reality

and education before technology is engaged as a pedagogical tool, because one’s presuppositions

ought to shape how technology is used. Also, one’s anthropology must be carefully discerned as

technology is brought into the classroom, for how one understands human nature will shape why

and how it is used in education.

Another article that had an equally simple, but important purpose, gave the history of the

development of the field of technology education (Jones, 2011). Jones noted that there are a

number of factors that can enhance or impede learning when technology is introduced in the

classroom. This new pedagogical tool may result in less time for instruction of content, because

clear learning uses of the technology had not been adequately developed, making lesson plans

more laborious, focused on how to use the technology instead of allowing students to learn

content through the new medium. Numerous other factors might decrease student learning if not

appropriately addressed, such as funding, continuous professional development, and teachers’

confidence in using technology (Jones, 2011).

Pellegrino (2011) relied on numerous studies of the effectiveness of formative

assessments in student achievement. Technology is a means to do a formative assessment and

receive immediate results, thus allowing the teacher to adjust, remediate, or move on in the

lesson. There exist many programs that provide this type of formative assessment, depending on

the class subject. Moreover, some web-based systems use scaffolding questions in order to aid

learning as students engage in guided practice or the application of the content provided, and

23


“technology can also support the design of complex, interactive tasks that extend the range of

knowledge, skills, and cognitive processes that can be assessed” (Pellegrino, 2011, p. 119). The

author concluded that there are at least three positive implications of technology in the

improvement of assessments:

First, individuals have realized that there are multiple roles for assessment to play in the

educational process and that one of the most valuable roles is the formative function of

assisting student learning. Second, cognitive research and theory have provided us with

rich models and representations of how students understand many of the key principles in

the curriculum, how students develop knowledge structures, and how to analyze and

understand simple and complex aspects of student performance. Third, technology makes

possible more flexible, tailored presentations to students of a much wider and richer array

of tasks and environments where students can learn and where they can show us what

they know and how they know it. Thus, there is an interesting and powerful confluence

among theory, research, technology, and practice, especially when it comes to the

integration of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. (pp. 129-130)

Carr acknowledged that outside of the classroom, the Internet has become an all-purpose

medium for information, and most information shared and gathered passes through this conduit.

This medium has many rich advantages. As a writer, Carr has immediate access to previously

inaccessible data, and the Internet allows many in society to speed up research, save time, save

gas, be able to bank and shop online, and schedule group meetings. Many changes that the

Internet has brought ought to be celebrated. Carr calls the Internet a “great boon” to society, but

he says that they come at a price (Carr, 2011, p. 6). Relying in previous research, including that

of McLuhan (2003), he stated:

24


Media are not just channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they

also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away

my capacity for concentration and contemplation. Whether I’m online or not, my mind

now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving

stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the

surface like a guy on a jet ski. (Carr, 2011, pp. 6-7)

Carr went on to cite dozens of studies that support his argument, pointing out that

because of the brain’s plasticity, the medium of the content is changing how we think. Students

today, he argued, physiologically have a more difficult time reading books, following linear

arguments, and concentrating for extended periods of time. For example, he cited Mangen’s

(2010) work, which recognizes that moving from paper to a screen does not change only the way

we navigate through a piece of writing, but also the degree of attention we give it and the depths

in which we can immerse ourselves (Carr, 2011, p. 90).

Catholic educators have to discern first what they want their students to learn, and then

how they want them to learn it, because technology is shaping our brains and changing at what

we are adept.

Schools’ use of the iPad. Many schools throughout the United States have begun to use

the iPad in a multitude of ways and have experienced varied results. Some schools have

implemented a complete one-to-one iPad interdisciplinary program, while others have focused

on using the iPad for a particular subject. In the midst of the variety of this technology’s

applications in schools, researchers have studied the effectiveness of 1:1 plans used in schools

The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment (JTLA) published a series of

studies on educational outcomes from 1:1 computing settings. One study focused entirely on the

25


quantitative results of a 1:1 laptop program across five schools in a three-year period. The

results varied among the five schools, but there was clear evidence of measurable changes in

teacher practices, student achievement, student engagement, and students’ research skills (Bebell

& O’Dwyer, 2010). Teachers substantially changed their strategies for lesson planning by

including technology across all disciplines. No subject area far surpassed any other in the

increase of the 1:1 use, and the study showed that the circumstantial differences among the

schools likely impacted the quantity of 1:1 use. The evidence also showed a dramatic increase in

student engagement and motivation in response to the enhanced educational access and

opportunities, which in turn improved student attentiveness in class. As students were observed,

they “would often walk into their class and greet the teacher asking if they would be ‘using their

laptops today.’ When a teacher responded positively, students would often cheer and visibly

express their pleasure” (Bebell & O’Dwyer, 2010, p. 22). The improved educational access and

opportunities also improved students’ research skills and collaboration with each other. Almost

70% of teachers reported an increase in the students’ ability to work together, showing less

dependence on the teachers, and 60% of teachers thought that students were better able to access

content and work according to their own learning styles (Bebell & O’Dwyer, 2010). Lastly,

although looking at state test scores cannot be considered a true experimental design, it is

interesting to note that in the three-year 1:1 program, the percent of students with passing math

scores on the state test increased from 59% to 70%. Yet given the wide variety of variables and

the mixed results of the complex methods used in this study, the authors stated: “It is impossible

to overstate the power of individual teachers in the success or failure of 1:1 computing” (Bebell

& O’Dwyer, 2010, p. 48). They concluded that when looking across all of the data, “it is clear

26


that the teachers nearly always control how and when students access and use technology during

the school day” (Bebell & O’Dwyer, 2010, p. 48).

Another study in this series from JTLA found similar results as the study above, but in

this study, there was an emphasis on the importance of a school culture in the teachers’ uptake

and integration of technology (Drayton, et al. 2010). The study began at the implementation of

the 1:1 program and continued for five years. It found a positive impact on student achievement,

but noted many problems that still remain. Evidence pointed to factors of the school culture

playing a prominent role in these problems. For example, the technology often increases a

teacher’s workload, because they have to devote time in the classroom for technical support.

Teachers have also expressed frustration with an increase in classroom management problems,

because as they approach one individual who is working with his or her device, the quality of

other students’ behavior often worsens. Teachers’ ability to integrate the new technology, their

openness to it, and their current levels of knowledge of technology affect the cultural, fostering a

proactive, supportive culture or a pessimistic, bitter culture (Drayton et al., 2010).

Professional development necessary to make the pedagogical shift a success. Almost

every study completed on the effects of 1:1 plans stressed the importance of not only a teacher’s

competence in the use of technology, but also his or her attitude about using it. Gomez et al.

(2008) highlighted this fact in a study titled Creating Social Relationships. The study led to

recommendations considered important in the successful integration of technology in the

classroom: “(a) create technically literate education professionals, (b) strengthen the practice-

theory connection, (c) provide more practice-centered training, and (d) reflect deeply into the

scholarship and practice of teaching” (2008, p. 117). Ritzhaupt (2012) drew the same

conclusions after studying over 700 teachers from over 100 schools in Florida. He obtained

27


strong results indicating how teachers use technology in the classroom dictated how well the

students are able to use it in order to reach curriculum objectives. Additionally, the viewpoint of

the teacher on the use of technology significantly affects the students’ effective use of the device

(Anderson, 2011). Anderson’s study highlighted the “importance of relationships between

preservice teachers’ beliefs and their potential integration of technology in their future

classrooms” (Anderson, 2011, p. 321). These studies show that teachers must be properly

prepared to integrate the technology, but first, they must be open to using it. Significant

professional development will increase the success of the use of a 1:1 plan, but the

administration of a school must foster faculty-wide acceptance of the plan.

In conclusion, true education happens through personal relationships. Thus when a 1:1

plan is integrated into the education in a Catholic school, the technology must be a means to

personal relationships and not used as the primary source of student learning. The goal of the

integration of any technology in Catholic schools must be to foster a strong, Christ-centered

community, for it is only in such a culture that students will learn and become who they are:

children of God.

This task is not easy, for technology is not neutral. As children use it, it affects their

brains. Studies of neuro-plasticity have shown that technology can shape how we interact with

each other and our general habits by quickly changing neurological patterns. Therefore, Catholic

schools have to determine how a 1:1 plan will lead to face-to-face relationships and deter

students from communicating only through technology. This requirement points to the crucial

need of high-quality professional development for teachers before and during the integration of a

1:1 plan. Professional development will also increase the competence, confidence, and positive

attitudes of teachers, all of which are essential factors for an effective implementation. The

28


studies reviewed above showed mixed results in the effective use of 1:1 plans compared to

“traditional” classrooms. The professional development of teachers was cited often as a

determining factor in the results; yet many of the studies suggested further research in order to

define other factors that lead to the results that have been observed.

Method

The purpose of this action research was to develop an effective technology plan with

iPads in the curricula of Pope John Paul the Great Catholic High School (JP) in a way that fosters

interpersonal relationships and enhances student learning. In order to accomplish this goal, adults

in Catholic schools with 1:1 plans were both surveyed and interviewed in order to develop a plan

rooted in experience. Two Likert scale surveys were used, one for each of the two types of

participants, teachers and administrators of these schools. Two semi-structured interviews were

used, one for each type of participant, in this mixed-method study.

Participants

Participants were willing administrators (n = 8) and all willing teachers (n = 23) of four

Catholic high schools that had implemented a 1:1 iPad program. The schools were purposefully

selected because of the type of technology program they offered and because of existing

relationships between the participating schools and JP.

Instruments and Materials

Survey instruments. Two Likert scale survey instruments were used at the two schools

to assess the administrators’ and teachers’ perceptions of the 1:1 plan’s affect on school

community, relationships between students and teachers, academic performance, and the

professional development needed (see Appendix A). The survey instrument for teachers

contained two demographic questions and consisted of 26 statements with a corresponding 5-

29


point Likert scale ranging from Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5). The survey

instrument for administrators of the schools consisted of 22 questions and a corresponding Likert

scale ranging from Not at all (1) to Fully (5) (see Appendix B). In addition to the Likert scale,

this survey also had one question, requesting the administrators to list the three most important

reasons for implementing the 1:1 iPad plan. The survey instrument for administrators ended with

an open-ended question.

Interview protocol. An original, semi-structured interview protocol containing 13

structured questions and various open-ended questions was used for teachers on the specific

steps taken to implement the 1:1 plan and their perspectives on the steps of implementation (see

Appendix C). A second, semi-structured interview protocol containing 15 questions was used

for administrators on the specific steps taken to implement the 1:1 plan and their perspectives on

the steps of implementation (see Appendix D). Participants were asked to respond to questions

such as “What was the quality of the professional development teachers received before

implementing the 1:1 plan?”

Design and Procedure

This mixed-method research project employed an explanatory design, first using surveys

to perform quantitative analyses, and then following up with interviews to explain the nature of

the relationships identified.

Contact was made with the administrations of the two high schools in November 2013,

and after a delay, in January 2014. The semi-structured surveys were administered via

SurveyMonkey to the teachers and administrators of the schools between November 2013 and

March 2014, depending on the circumstances of each school, and participants were given two

weeks to complete them. In order to access all the teachers, the survey links were sent by the

30


principals of the schools. A reminder was sent via email, one week after the survey was

distributed. In January, February, and March of 2014 recorded phone interviews were conducted,

lasting near 30 minutes with administrators (n = 3) and teachers (n = 5) who self-identified on

the survey as willing to be interviewed.

Findings

Given that the purpose of this study was to research 1:1 iPad programs in Catholic

schools in order to develop an implementation plan at JP, the research examined the how the use

of iPads enhanced student learning, fostered relationships in the school communities, and

furthered the schools’ mission statements. To accomplish this task, three research questions led

the study. First, how have other Catholic schools implemented the use of iPads in the classroom

in order to improve student learning? Second, how has the introduction of iPads in other Catholic

schools affected relationships and community? Third, what are the best methods for the initial

implementation of iPads at JP that will best serve its mission?

This mixed-method study employed two original Likert surveys: one for teachers (n = 23)

and one for administrators (n = 8). The survey results from the administrations of all the schools

were combined and coded according to a Likert scale and entered into an Excel spreadsheet. The

same was done with the results of the teachers from the schools. The data were inspected for

data entry errors, such as outliers and out of range values. The data in the spreadsheet were then

arranged so that data analyses could be conducted. Descriptive statistics were calculated on the

quantitative survey items in order to derive the mean, standard deviation, and response

frequencies.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with willing participants of both groups.

Two interview protocols were used: one for teachers and one for administrators. Inductive

31


analysis was used to interpret the data. A process of coding was used and a codebook was kept in

order to prevent human error in the coding process. First, open coding was used to identify

common use of words and phrases. Major categories in the transcripts were found. Then, the

open codes were collapsed into more specific codes in the areas where overlap was clearly

present. These collapsed codes were then carefully reviewed in order to discern four major

positive themes in the combined interviews. Based on these major themes, specific claims were

made, supported by the data.

iPads and Improved Student Learning

Regarding the use of iPads to improve learning, descriptive statistics were calculated

from the survey of teachers (n = 23) from four Catholic high schools in order to find the mean

and standard deviation of how teachers used the iPad in the classroom for different tasks. The

results of the survey showed that the amount the iPad is used by teachers is most often

occasionally. The data showed neither little use of the iPad nor high use of the iPad when

considering all the surveyed possible uses. The majority of teachers, however, used the iPads

often and very often in three areas. First, 70% of the teachers chose to communicate with their

students via the iPad either often or very often. The second and third areas of high use of the

iPads involve the tasks of conducting research and completing assignments. It is noteworthy,

however, that despite the high use of iPads to accomplish common learning tasks, very few of

the teachers used the iPads to develop higher order thinking. Only 13% of the teachers used the

iPads to teach content analysis, application, synthesis, and evaluation of content (see Table 1).

The teachers’ responses with regard to the 1:1 iPad Program’s effect on student learning

were generally positive. The majority of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that the iPads had

helped improve student learning in every surveyed learning area, except two; first, only 30% of

32


the teachers agreed or strongly agreed that the iPads had helped to improve critical thinking

skills, and second, slightly less than half of the teachers believed that the iPads successfully

improved student productivity.

One should note that 22% of the teachers perceived that the iPads had decreased the

productivity of the students. Additionally, a high percentage of teachers had not seen a

difference in three types of learning. In the areas of improved critical thinking skills, improved

creativity, and improved productivity more than a third of all teachers observed no change in the

students now that they all have iPads in the classroom (see Table 2).

The data collected from administrators (n = 8) of four different schools showed that of

the many possible ways that they could have participated in the implementation of their 1:1 iPad

programs, they were engaged at an above average level. There are notable details. 75% of the

administrators personally participated in the development of the program. The data show that

this 75% focused their personal participation on the iPad program in various ways, especially in

studying best practices of previously implemented 1:1 iPad programs and modeling best

practices for their faculty before each student received an iPad.

Administrator involvement significantly declined, however, regarding ongoing

maintenance of the program. The data showed that continued evaluation of the 1:1 iPad program

was occurring, and was higher in some areas than others, but the overall administrator

engagement decreased once the program was established. Another area of low administrator

presence was seeking involvement outside the school community. Only two administrators

actively sought supplemental funding for the program, and only one administrator actively

pursued the support of the diocese.

33


The mean, standard deviation, and specific responses to questions related to how

administrators had participated in and directed the implementation of the iPad program on the

larger school level are in Table 3.

Seven semi-structured interviews were conducted to address this study’s three primary

research questions; five of the interviews were of teachers, one was of a senior administrator who

also teaches, and one was of the principal of a school. With regard to student learning, the

interviews of teachers focused primarily on the perceived improvements and detractions of the

1:1 iPad program. Neither the teachers nor the administrators described consistent, concrete

methods of implementation; the interviews found diverse and poorly structured professional

development sessions prior to the implementation. Moreover, all of the schools allowed teachers

to integrate the iPads into their instruction according to each teacher’s own level of ability and

preference. The primary theme across all interviews with regard to how the iPads were

implemented in order to improve student learning was it varied from school to school and from

teacher to teacher.

The interviews of the individual teachers thus revealed findings primarily related to

personal teacher implementation and the consequent learning experiences of the students. Four

major positive themes were present throughout all the interviews: the iPad as a resource to create

more engaging, interactive lessons; students and teachers had become more organized; increased

student accountability; and classroom management. An elaboration of each is necessary.

Universally, all teachers recognized the iPad as a resource for learning because it

provided immediate access to the Internet. Teachers were able to plan more interactive

cooperative learning assignments, because the students were able to research together, interact

through the use of multi-media apps, and all were able to collaborate, because the technology

34


never rested in the hands of one group member. The presence of the Internet also provided the

opportunity for students to enter more deeply into the content presented by the teacher through

personal, in-class research and planned activities related directly to their findings: “[the iPad] has

increased their ability to share projects that we have given them to do, which is good, because

with the iPads, they can do videos and things.” The resources of apps and Internet access have

increased the options and flexibility that teachers have in lesson planning: “[the iPad] has

allowed us to do more…we have more flexibility in how we prepare lesson plans, because we

can put a lot of things online that the students can access as opposed to having to write, and so

there is a lot more that we can do in that regard.” The teachers stressed that the iPad is a great

resource, but it had not replaced them as teachers; just as many other resources, the teachers

intentionally did not always use the iPad in their lessons.

Another point of interest with regard to using the iPad as a resource in the classroom is

that the variables of teacher age and the amount of teaching experience did not significantly alter

teacher perceptions of the iPad. Not only did the quantitative data not reveal statistically

significant correlations between teacher opinions of the iPad and their age and teaching

experience, but the interviews also did not demonstrate such correlations. A few interviewees

acknowledged that those teachers who resisted the introduction and use of the iPad were mostly

older, but it was discussed that there were just as many, if not more, older teachers who were

open to using them. The most common and prevalent data gathered in this area demonstrated

that older teachers took longer to learn how to use the iPad, needed more professional

development, and relied more heavily on other teachers for support.

The iPads had also significantly increased the organization of the students. Their notes,

assignments, textbooks, and access to uploaded teacher resources were now located in one place.

35


It was also now easier to submit assignments and have them returned, because of the electronic

format. Both the teachers and administrators observed that students took better care of

technology than they do of notebooks and textbooks, thus they always had almost all the

necessary content for every class with them in a convenient, light-weight device. Moreover,

there had not been any theft of the iPads in the schools, and all who were interviewed attributed

the lack of theft to the fact that everyone had one. They compared this phenomenon with

students’ cell phones, again attributing a lack of theft to the devices’ omnipresence.

The increase in organization and the care for the iPads led to an increased accountability

of the students. Common excuses, such as “I left my book at home,” “I didn’t know the

assignment because I was absent,” “I lost my notes/homework” no longer sufficed, because they

always had what they needed organized on the iPad. Also, students were more often held

accountable for remaining on task because of increased quizzes that immediately follow the

delivery and guided practice of content.

Lastly, an improvement in classroom management appeared since the iPad

implementation, which creates a stable and safe environment for learning, but the development

was due to marked increase in off task student behavior. The students were using the iPads to

Instant Message fellow students throughout the school, play games, and make use of apps

irrelevant to the lesson. Teachers do not consider this behavior to be atypical, citing that

doodling, writing notes to friends, working on homework for other classes, etc., took place

before the iPads’ presence; now the students were simply using more sophisticated technological

distractions. One difference between the low-tech and high-tech distractions emerged, however.

Teachers stated that it was more difficult not only to see when students were off task, but also to

catch them. Prior to the iPads, teachers could see doodling or another subject’s homework on the

36


desk, but now the teachers had a harder time distinguishing between when students were taking

notes on the iPad and when they were sending messages to a friend across the classroom. It

appeared to be easier for students to become off task because they had more enticing tools at

their fingertips such as Youtube. Moreover, although sometimes it may be easy to see a student

off task,

catching them is a different story, because … they hit one to two buttons and they are

back on the screen that you want them to be on. So, you might know they are off task but

by the time you can get to their desks, they are on task.

Despite this negative result of the iPads’ presence and the positive observations by the

teachers and administrators above, the interviewees acknowledged that they still lacked the data

necessary to determine measurably if the move to a 1:1 iPad program had notably improved

student learning. Teachers noted that there had not been a significant positive or negative impact

of the new program; either grades had not changed at the time of the interviews or teachers

perceived indecision, mixed results, or no change in the content that was being taught. More

time was needed in order to possess definitive evidence of the 1:1 program’s effect on student

learning.

The iPads’ Effect on Relationships

Apart from seeking to understand how iPads were used to improve learning, the research

conducted also was designed to assess how 1:1 iPad programs affect different types of

relationships in schools and the community as a whole. A survey of the teachers revealed that

the average response to survey questions related to how iPads have affected relationships and

community was very close to have not seen a difference. The perspective of the teachers

suggested that the presence of iPads in the school had not significantly affected relationships

37


either positively or negatively. There is one significant exception, however. While much less

than half of the teachers agreed that the iPad programs improved student/student relationships,

increased face-to-face direct instruction, or face-to-face student interactions, 52% of the teachers

perceived that teacher relationships with the students had improved after the 1:1 iPad programs

were implemented (see Table 4).

In addition to deriving descriptive statistics from data analysis of survey responses,

correlational analyses were conducted of data regarding the variables of iPad program

implementations and relationships. These analyses demonstrated very strong, positive

connections between these variables. The amount of time spent using iPads for communication

between two parties strongly correlated with improvements in the relationships between those

two parties. Moreover, the data exhibited a strong, positive connection between the iPad

increasing teacher productivity and an increase in face-to-face encounters between students as

demonstrated in Tables 5, 6, and 7.

Supporting this quantitative data, the findings of the interviews corresponded with the

identified correlations between these variables. Every teacher acknowledged at least a minor

improvement in teacher / student relationships, but most perceived an above average

improvement. This latter perception was due entirely to one change in student behavior when

the 1:1 plan was implemented. The students began to communicate significantly more with

teachers via email after school hours. All of the teachers affirmed that they, too, were

responding and interacting with the students now with email throughout the afternoon and

evening. Moreover, the teachers claimed that they were able to prepare better for face-to-face

meetings with students ahead of time, thus reducing the time of these meetings and increasing

the amount of requested meetings by students. For example, when teachers were able to receive

38


and review an essay draft before a student meeting, they could immediately address the content

of the paper when the meeting began. Previously, the students had to wait for an English teacher

to read the paper in the teacher’s presence, and then discuss its content.

There also was no perceived change in student / student relationships outside of the

classroom. Although teachers and administrators feared that student self-isolation might occur,

they ultimately did not perceive a change in student socializing after the 1:1 programs were

present. Both groups of interviewees noted that the students’ lives were already saturated with

technology, and they had already regularly communicated via social media on their phones. The

iPad appeared not to have altered these social dynamics; the interviewees consistently noted that

when students were going to communicate via technology, the difference was now they had a

choice of what device to use. Moreover, during lunch, the iPads were mostly open only when

students were trying to complete work for an upcoming class, which was identical to the open

text books that teachers would occasionally see while a student attempted to finish homework

and socialize with his peers at the same time.

Nor was there any perceived change in the teachers’ and administrators’ relationships

with parents. Universally, this fact was attributed to technological means of communication

already in place before the 1:1 iPad plan was implemented. For example, electronic grade books,

which provide real time student grades to parents, offered a means of communication long before

the iPads’ presence. The iPads were not being used to communicate with parents.

When all things were considered, the introduction of 1:1 iPad programs generally was a

positive experience for the schools.

39


The Best Methods of a 1:1 iPad Program Implementation at JP

Lastly, the research was designed to demonstrate what would be the best approach to

implementing a 1:1 iPad program at JP in service of the school’s mission. Regarding this

research question, only one survey question provided quantitative data, and this data could show

only how well other schools’ iPad implementations served their schools’ missions. When asked

whether the iPad programs furthered the mission of their schools, 50% of the teachers agreed to

some extent, 41% were uncertain, and one teacher disagreed.

The findings from the interviews provided detailed explanations of processes used to

implement the 1:1 iPad programs. Each school varied widely in how they chose to role out their

program. Variables such as the initial decision to do the implementation, professional

development, differing unexpected problems, the amount of money available, faculty

demographics, and system management all varied due to a school’s circumstances and the

amount of research of other schools that the school conducted prior to implementation.

Although many ideas were collected, perceived mistakes and successes were described, and a

large amount of recommendations were given for a school preparing to initiate a 1:1 iPad

program, this research did not provide findings that could conclusively identify the best methods

for an implementation at JP. Rather, the results suggest that the methods of implementation will

depend significantly on the circumstances of the school.

In conclusion, the research showed that the iPad could be a powerful resource for

teachers and increase student interactivity to some degree. Due to the newness of 1:1 iPad

programs in schools researched in this study, not enough data existed to draw conclusions on

whether they improve student learning with statistical significance. Moreover, the change in

culture and relationships in the Catholic schools that integrated a 1:1 iPad program proved to be

40


minor. It is possible that because the most common response to the amount of time the iPads

were used in the classroom was occasional, iPads did not appear to have a significantly

noticeable affect on the school and its members as a whole.

Discussion and Extension

The purpose of this study was to obtain important information on how to develop a 1:1

iPad technology plan in the curricula of Pope John Paul the Great Catholic High School in a way

that fosters interpersonal relationships and enhances student learning. Once the data were

collected from the surveys and interviews, descriptive statistics were calculated to shed light on

areas such as student learning, the iPads’ affects on community and relationships, and the best

way to implement a 1:1 iPad program. These quantitative analyses showed how the iPad both

had helped schools and had little effect. Correlational analyses identified strong correlations

between the amount of iPad use and positive effects on relationships. Lastly, detailed

explanations of survey results were obtained via the qualitative data analysis of the interviews.

Discussion of Major Findings

The findings showed that the amount of time that teachers used the iPads in classroom is

most often occasionally. The data showed neither little use of the iPad nor high use of the iPad

when considering all the surveyed possible uses. This fact suggests that it would be difficult

gauge any significant effect on student learning of an iPad program from this research or any

study of these schools. Occasional use of a piece of technology as a tool does not differ from the

example of putting an LCD projector into all classrooms, which then are occasionally used.

Some studies have shown that the identifiable impacts of technology use on student learning do

not correlate with a change in student grades, e.g., Carr’s (2012) study of using the iPad to

increase mathematics scores. It found negligible differences between pre-test and post-test

41


scores. Thus when a technological device is used only occasionally in a school, it would be

difficult to observe changes. As discussed in the literature review, it must be reiterated,

however, that contradictory findings in this area abound. Drayton et al (2010) found a general

improvement in student learning over five years, but it also noted that the improvement varied

from school to school.

The variable of the amount of time the iPad was used suggests a point of further research.

Not only can we study why it was found that the average use of the iPad among all the schools

and teachers was occasionally, but also how learning changes with the amount that the iPad is

used in the classroom.

Yet, in this study, occasionally was only the average of all the teacher responses

regarding the amount of time they used the iPad. The majority of teachers stated that they used

the iPads often and very often in three areas. First, 70% of the teachers chose to communicate

with their students via the iPad either often or very often. This study found that this increase in

communication strongly correlates with improved relationships between teachers and students.

Yen (2012) found similar results, noting that teacher engagement was an effective predictor of

learner satisfaction. Yen also found that an increase in communication can happen with or

without new technology; therefore, this correlation merits further research in order to determine

whether a causal relationship is present with the iPad. The implications would be significant if it

were found that an increase in communication via an iPad would improve relationships. To

reiterate, true education can only occur in the context of relationships; if technology can be used

to strengthen relationships in a Catholic school as opposed to the detriment it is causing them in

the culture at large (Strom, 2011, Terkle, 2012, van der Laan, 2012), then we must identify the

key causes that are present in Catholic schools but are absent outside of them. To speculate,

42


perhaps when digital communication is focused on, directed toward, and involves face-to-face

relationships, it will strengthen a community instead of leading people into isolation.

All of the schools involved in this research had implemented a paradigm shift in how

information, “dialogue”, assignments, content, etc. were passing from teacher to student and vice

versa. Case studies of these schools would be able to go beyond teacher perception and possibly

offer more objective findings on how relationships are affected when this shift occurs through

the observation of teacher / student interactions in the classroom and in the school as a whole.

The teachers in this study perceived minor improvements in their relationships with students, and

the interviews supported this finding. The interviewees did not respond with enthusiastic yeses;

rather, most teachers had to give thought to the question of relationship improvement.

The second and third areas of high use of the iPads involve the tasks of conducting

research and completing assignments. Simply put, these tasks are the easiest and most obvious

to plan with the capabilities of the iPad, and the findings showed that very few of the teachers

used the iPads to develop deeper levels of thinking. The low use of iPads to develop deeper

levels of learning deserves more attention; why are the teachers not using the iPads in this

capacity? Is it due to inexperience, ignorance of the technology, teachers are set in their ways,

and/or were deeper levels of learning not occurring even before the presence of iPads in the

classroom?

Findings with regard to the schools’ professional development on iPads provided some

insight into the above two questions. Generally, professional development before and during the

1:1 iPad program’s implementation was not well organized, and many teachers felt overwhelmed

with the amount of information provided in short periods of time, did not feel that they could

adequately use the iPads, and believed that they did not know how to use the iPad to its full

43


potential in the classroom. Nevertheless, the majority of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that

the iPads had helped improve student learning.

There are two exceptions to the last statement. While teachers generally believed that

iPads improved student learning, the majority of teachers did not think that the iPads improved

student learning in two specific learning areas. First, only 30% of the teachers agreed or

strongly agreed that the iPads had helped to improve critical thinking skills, and second, slightly

less than half of the teachers believed that the iPads successfully improved student productivity.

This pattern is likely due to the fact that these teachers now use the iPad as an in class resource

for immediate research of presented content. If teachers were to increase this amount of use,

lesson plans would be able to use the students’ personal findings to challenge them to link them

with the content, apply it to life, and evaluate the content.

Again, findings indicate that a large amount of teachers do not think that student

productivity has improved, and this fact is likely due to the significant increase in off task

behavior. The iPad acts a source of many distractions and it is often at students’ fingertips.

Additionally, the physical structure and user interface of the iPad makes it easier for students to

dissimulate off task behavior and escape being caught. The physical actions of an off task

student differs little from that of an on task student. The user interface allows students to hide

how exactly they are off task, and it also provides students with the ability to immediate erase

their off task behavior with a couple of hand gestures once they perceive they have attracted the

teacher’s attention.

One should note the number of teachers who believed that the 1:1 iPad program hurt

student learning. A range of 9% to 23% of the teachers, depending on the type of learning,

disagreed with the statement that the iPads have improved student learning. Moreover, 22% of

44


the teachers perceived that the iPads had decreased the productivity of the students. A number of

variables likely contribute to the large discrepancy in teacher responses regarding student

learning. Presuppositions that teachers bring to the idea of a 1:1 technological device program,

overtly displayed attitudes toward the 1:1 program, job satisfaction, current teacher / student, and

how the iPad is used in the classroom all will affect teachers’ observations. Again, case studies

would enable a researcher to investigate more deeply the causes this variety of responses. Also,

it is worthwhile to note the possibility that this discrepancy in responses may be related to the

contradictory findings of previous studies that have measured only student learning. Many of

these studies have found that the presence of a 1:1 technological device program has had only

nominal effects on student learning. Carr (2012) found negligible differences in pre-tests and

post-tests when the iPad was used to improve student learning in mathematics. The widespread

use of 1:1 programs is new, however, and there remains a lack of consistent measurable data on

the iPads’ effect on student learning. More years of their presence in schools are needed in order

to identify statistically significant findings from that 1:1 iPad programs and to draw significant

conclusions in this area.

Looking at the findings from the administrator interviews, it is significant that 75% of the

administrators personally participated in the development of the program. This fact likely was

instrumental in improving teacher buy-in, providing a sense of support, and reducing a perceived

unhealthy detachment of the administration from the daily life in the classroom. These problems

still existed, but the interviews revealed that the teachers appreciated the presence of the

administration and were not significantly unhappy with new iPad programs. Most of the

schools’ decided on the 1:1 iPad implementation with a top-down approach, but faculties were

consulted to varying degrees, and the decisions were not an unexpected surprise for them.

45


Administrator involvement significantly declined, however, in their responses regarding

ongoing maintenance of the program. The data showed that continued evaluation of the 1:1 iPad

program was occurring, and was higher in some areas than others, but the overall administrator

engagement decreased once the program was established. This general change constitutes a

major problem for the wellbeing of the new 1:1 program, but more importantly, the wellbeing of

the school as a whole. With an unprecedented introduction of a teaching method foreign to all

teachers and the unknown factors of how it is affecting teaching, in-class experience,

relationships, etc., the evaluation and modification of such a program must always be ongoing

and frequent in the early years of the adoption.

From interviews, four major positive themes presented themselves. First, the iPad is a

resource to create more engaging, interactive lessons; second, students and teachers had become

more organized because of iPads; third, there was a marked increase in student accountability;

and fourth, classroom management improved. Simply put, JP can capitalize on these positive

findings by nurturing them in the design of professional development, user policies, and

obligations of how the iPad is used.

The average response to survey questions related to how iPads have affected relationships

and community was very close to have not seen a difference. There was one significant

exception, however. While much less than half of the teachers agreed that the iPad programs

improved student / student relationships, increased face-to-face direct instruction, or face-to-face

student interactions, 52% of the teachers perceived that teacher relationships had improved with

the students after the 1:1 iPad programs were implemented. The universal reason provided, also

the only reason provided, was that there was an increase in the amount of teacher / student

communication related to schoolwork, specifically via email and outside of school hours. A

46


question ought to be raised at this point. Was there truly improved relationships or was there

merely more communication? Although these two variables often positively influence each

other, it still is possible for an increase in different forms of communication not to benefit

relationships and even harm them. Moreover, Yen (2012) found that increased teacher

engagement strongly predicted learner satisfaction regardless of the use of technology. With

these possibilities in mind, it is suggested that future studies look more closely at the relationship

between the increase in communication and the change in the quality of relationships with 1:1

iPad programs.

To discuss further, is it healthy for the balanced life of a teacher to correspond daily with

students into the evening? Teachers already work many hours outside of school, and they need

to foster their prayer life, fulfill their vocation to love their families or religious communities,

and allow the students to take advantage of the little time that they have with their parents.

Generally, during a school year, children spend much more time with their teachers than their

parents. When students leave school, the fostering of the familial relationships is crucial.

Moreover, a school and its teachers are not the primary educators of children; the parents are. It

is possible that this increased communication may negatively impact parent / child relationships.

There is a positive side of this new teacher availability, however. Yes, parents are the primary

educators of their children, but Catholic schoolteachers are called to support the parents. At

times, when parents cannot sufficiently help their children with the content of their homework,

the presence of the teacher’s knowledge can be helpful. Further research into the positive and/or

negative effects of amount of after-school teacher / student contact on relationships would be

beneficial.

47


Survey data indicated that there was not any perceived change in the teachers and

administrators relationships with parents. When asked whether the iPad programs furthered the

mission of their schools, 50% of the teachers agreed to some extent, 41% were uncertain, and

one teacher disagreed. Again, teacher perception could have been influenced by a number of

variables not addressed in this study. Case studies would be beneficial to explore the true answer

to the question by in-class observations, the exploration of whether the mission of the school is

generally being lived in the school as a whole, and more personal interactions with faculty, staff,

and students.

Each school varied widely in how they chose to roll out their program, and thus the third

research question could not be answered adequately: The question was: what are the best

methods for the initial implementation of iPads at JP that will best serve its mission? Variables

such as the initial decision to do the implementation, professional development, differing

unexpected problems, the amount of money available, faculty demographics, and system

management all varied due to a school’s circumstances and the amount of research of other

schools that they conducted prior to implementation. Although many ideas were collected,

perceived mistakes and successes were described, and a large amount of recommendations were

given for a school preparing to initiate a 1:1 iPad program, the research did not provide findings

that could conclusively identify best methods for an implementation at JP. Rather, the results

suggest that the methods of implementation will depend significantly on the circumstances of

any given school. In support of this study’s findings, the studies of Gomez (2008), Ritzhaupt

(2012), and Anderson (2011) all found that of the many differences in over 100 schools the

competence and the disposition of the teachers were the primary factors in the success of

48


technology use in the classroom. It appears that whatever a school’s circumstances, it must use

them to design an implementation plan that will prepare and excite the teachers.

At this point, the next step necessary in this research is to take this inventory of various

examples of professional development, assess the circumstances of JP via a case study or a

survey of faculty, students, and staff, and then decide how best to answer this research question.

The findings of this study are a small component in the preparation of a designed plan of

implementation.

Dissemination

The results of this study will be disseminated in a number of ways. Principals, including

my own, have asked to read the paper. The Director of Technology at JP is currently developing

a small group of less than 10 teachers to participate in a technology integration pilot program in

order to gather experiential data. These data would inform a potential decision to proceed to a

1:1 technology device program, and the results from this study will compliment the discoveries

from the pilot program. The JP principal wants to discuss the content of the paper with me and

use it in our long term strategic plan for the integration of technology at JP. Lastly, the results

will be shared with the principals of the four schools that participated in my research.

Limitations

First, there was not any interaction with students, and they constitute a very important

stakeholder in this research. The students could have provided crucial perspectives and findings

that could have been compared to the data from the administrators and teachers. Also, because

the 1:1 iPad program significantly affected them, as well, their perspective would be necessary in

order to have more complete answers to the three research questions of this study.

49


The best way to resolve the student involvement problem is to do case studies. Obtaining

consent for student participation would have been difficult and time consuming. This challenge

is primarily due to the fact that principals were not interested in interacting with me; with one

exception, the only interaction I had with principals from the schools that participated was an

email of approval and a statement that they would disseminate the survey link in an email to

faculty and staff once the information was provided.

A second limitation of the study was a lack of pertinent questions in both interview

protocols. First, more questions were necessary that directly related to effect on student learning.

Second, the interview protocols should have included more questions related to the iPad and its

integration into the missions of the schools. This lack of questions was an oversight on my part.

They simply need to be integrated in any future study.

A third limitation of the study was the lower than anticipated response rate of both

teachers and administrators of the four schools. As in any investigation, the low rate of response

may negatively impact the validity of the findings. Would have incentives increased

participation? In the sometimes-hectic professions of teachers and administrators, it is common

to pass over invitations to participate in research. The method of disseminating the invitation to

participate in the study and access to the online survey may have contributed to this limitation.

The principals of the four schools performed these tasks. A letter of invitation and a link to the

surveys was distributed to the administration and faculty in an email from the principal. This

fact may have reduced teacher participation in fear that principals were involved in this study

and would have access to personal responses. A better means of invitation might have been

helpful. Timing was difficult, however, and working out how I could access the email addresses

50


of school employees was prevented by the amount of time available and the possible security

risk that principals might have perceived.

Another limitation to the study was the third research question was too grand in its scope.

It would have been better to have framed it: “What were the processes used to implement 1:1

iPad programs at different schools, which will be used to form an effective plan of

implementation at JP?” The findings of this action research revealed diverse circumstances

among schools that had determined the organization of professional development, making it

impossible to answer the original research question.

The last limitation of the study is that for a study that sought better to understand the

impact a 1:1 iPad plan had on community and relationships, the findings lacked relational and

personal details that were necessary for the purpose of the study. Case studies would have

provided such details, but time prevented this research design. To view this limitation positively,

this study may serve as a springboard for case studies of the four schools. Also, the 1:1

programs have not been present in Catholic schools long enough to allow for the collection of a

large amount of data. It is suggested that after waiting a few more years for more quantitative

data to be available, case studies should be initiated that focus on the 1:1 program’s service to the

mission of Catholic schools and an intricate look at relationships. Also, students need to be

included through ongoing interviews in order to gain a more complete understanding of the

iPads’ effect on relationships in the Catholic schools with 1:1 iPad programs.

Future Directions

Many new questions have surfaced after the completion of this mixed method study.

Will the quantitative data that will be available in the years to come note any significant impact

on student learning? Will the iPad or other 1:1 plans continue to regulate the devices as one of

51


many tools for teachers to use or will they begin a shift in national educational structures,

including Catholic schools? Will Catholic schools be attentive to what Pope Benedict XVI and

Pope Francis have written about technology’s end or will we continue to see a general

incorporation of technology in education, simply because this is the national trend? In other

words, will Catholic schools be attentive to making sure that the technology leads to

interpersonal, sacramental relationships that do not exist in the virtual world? It is hoped that

these questions will be explored in the years to come in order to lead to a dissemination of the

best approaches Catholic schools can take toward the integration of technology into their

pedagogy.

Future actions based on this study are imminent. As JP explores the use of the iPad and

similar technologies in the classroom, the findings will be a part of the discussion of how to

proceed with the further integration of technology in the classroom and the decision whether to

move to a 1:1 device plan. Moreover, this study has demonstrated that further study is

necessary. Specifically, case studies that focus on the second research question of this study are

imperative. Catholic schools need to be attentive to relationships in their communities and

determine how the presence of technology affects them.

This action research project delved into a vital area of study for the concrete benefit of

Catholic schools. The Church teaches that there is no better 1:1 plan than a teacher with his or

her pupil, yet this fact does not preclude the presence of iPads or equivalent devices in schools.

Through the Incarnation, God taught humanity that the divine pedagogy, and the entirety of

education, is relationships. Culturally, technologically advanced countries have seen a major

change in relationships, especially among the youth, because of the sudden presence of social

media and the ability to quickly communicate through mobile devices. In order to remain

52


faithful to the mission of the Catholic school, which is the mission of the Catholic Church,

Catholic educators must constantly consider the best use of technology, relying primarily on the

philosophical, theological, and anthropological truths that She teaches. Empirical data must be

collected through studies, as well. Truth will not contradict truth, and the integration of Church

teaching and action research will enable Catholic schools to avoid blindly following national

trends and choose well their technology use policies.

The “how” that this research provides will be instrumental in the integration of

technology into Catholic schools, but it is a secondary question, which follows the more

important issues described above. Once a school adequately answers the question of “what” the

purpose of using a 1:1 iPad program is, then it will be ready for the next step, which involves this

action research. The details of how to implement the program should all be rooted in this

purpose.

53


References

Anderson, S. (2011). Relationships among preservice teachers’ technology-related abilities,

beliefs, and intentions to use technology in their future classrooms. Journal of Educational

Computing Research, 45(3), 321-338. doi:10.2190/EC.45.3.d

Bebell, D. & O’Dwyer, L.M. (2010). Educational outcomes and research from 1:1 computing

settings. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(1). Retrieved from

http://www.jtla.org.

Benedict XVI. (2010). Address to participants in the plenary assembly of the pontifical council

for culture. Retrieved from Vatican site:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2010/november/documents/

hf_ben-xvi_spe_20101113_pc-cultura_en.html

Benedict XVI. (2010). Verbum Domini. Retrieved from Vatican website:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_ben-

xvi_exh_20100930_verbum-domini_en.html

Benedict XVI. (2011). Message for the 45th World Communications Day. Retrieved from the

Vatican website:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/communications/documents/

hf_ben-xvi_mes_20110124_45th-world-communications-day_en.html

Bielefeldt, T. (2012). Guidance for technology decisions from classroom observation. Journal of

Research on Technology in Education, 44(3), 205-223.

54


Carr, J. (2012). Does math achievement "h'app'en" when iPads and game-based learning are

incorporated into fifth-grade mathematics instruction?. Journal of Information Technology

Education: Research, 11, 269-286.

Carr, N. (2011). The Shallows. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc..

Catholic Information Services. (2012). Technology and the new evangelization: Criteria for

discernment. Washington, DC: Lynch, J., & Borras, M.

Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Cook, T. J., & Simonds, T. A. (2011). The charism of 21st-century catholic schools: building a

culture of relationships. Catholic Education: A Journal of Inquiry and Practice, 14(3), 319-

333.

Costabile, A. (2012). Impact of technology on relationships in educational settings: International

perspectives. Taylor and Francis.

Crichton, S. (2012). Personal devices in public settings: Lessons learned from an iPod

Touch/iPad project. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 10(1), 23-31.

Drayton, B., Falk, J.K., Stroud, R., Hobbs, K., & Hammerman, J. (2010). After installation:

Ubiquitous computing and high school science in three experienced, high-technology

schools. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(3). Retrieved from

http://www.jtla.org.

Frick, T. (1991). Restructuring education through technology. Fastback, 326.

Gan, E. (2010). Infinite bandwidth. Steubenville, OH: Emmaus Road Publishing.

55


Gomez, L., Sherin, M.G., Griesdorn, J., Finn, L. (2008). Creating social relationships: The role

of technology in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(2), 117-

131. doi:10.1177/0022487107314001

Hertlein, K. (2012). Digital dwelling: Technology in couple and family relationships. Family

Relations, 61(3), 374-387. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2012.00702.x

Ives, E. (2012). Igeneration: The social cognitive effects of digital technology on teenagers.

Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED543278.

Jefferies, P. (2007). Exploring the relationships between pedagogy, ethics and technology:

Building a framework for strategy development. Technology, Pedagogy and Education,

16(1), 111-126. doi:10.1080/14759390601168122

Jones, A. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward.

International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), 191-212.

doi:10.1007/s10798-011-9174-4

Lewis, M. (2012). Development and implementation of high school chemistry modules using

touch-screen technologies. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(8), 1012-1018.

doi:10.1021/ed200484n

Lloyd, M. (2010). There, yet not there: Human relationships with technology. Journal of

Learning Design, 3(2), 1-13. doi:10.5204/jld.v3i2.46

Nuzzi, R. J. (2000). Catholic identity. In Hunt, T.C., Joseph, E.A., & Nuzzi, R. J. (Eds.),

Catholic Schools Still Make a Difference: Ten Years of Research 1991-2000 (pp. 9-20).

Washington, D.C.: The National Catholic Education Association.

56


Paul VI. (1965). Dei verbum [The Word of God]. Retrieved from Vatican website:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-

ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html

Paul VI. (1965). Gravissimum educationis [On Christian Education]. Retrieved from Vatican

website: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-

ii_decl_19651028_gravissimum-educationis_en.html

Pellegrino. Perspectives on the integration of technology and assessment. (2011). Journal of

Research on Technology in Education, 43(2), 119.

Ritzhaupt, A. (2012). An investigation of factors influencing student use of technology in K-12

classrooms using path analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(3), 229-

254. doi:10.2190/EC.46.3.b

Sands, A. (2012). Protecting investments: Third-party warranty coverage for tablets. School

Business Affairs, 78(1), 20-21.

Spires, H. (2012). The new learning ecology of one-to-one computing environments: Preparing

teachers for shifting dynamics and relationships. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher

Education, 28(2), 63-72.

Strom, P. (2012). Growing up with social networks and online communities. The Education

Digest, 78(1), 48-51.

St. Cecilia Academy. (2012). Using technology at St. Cecilia Academy: a practice based on

research and human relationsionship. Nashville, TN: Thomas, M. Retrieved from

http://stcecilia.edu/about/technology.php on July 5, 2013

57

http://stcecilia.edu/about/technology.php


Terkle, S. (2011). The tethered self: Technology reinvents intimacy and solitude. Continuing

Higher Education Review, 75, 28-31.

van der Laan, J. (2012). Language and being human in technology. Bulletin of Science,

Technology Society, 32(3), 241-252. doi:10.1177/0270467612458092

Varacalli, J. A. (2010). The necessity of the Catholic school in America in a time of cultural

crisis: propositions and proposals. Catholic Social Science Review, 15, 299-310.

Yen, C. (2012). A study of the predictive relationships between faculty engagement, learner

satisfaction and outcomes in multiple learning delivery modes. International Journal of

Distance Education Technologies, 10(1), 74-87. doi:10.4018/jdet.2012010105

58


Table 1

Mean, Standard Deviation, Response Count, and Frequency for Teacher Survey Questions

Regarding how much the iPad is used in the Classroom

Variable M SD Not at all Rarely Occasionally Often Very often

Teacher / student communication

3.96 1.06 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 4 (17.4%) 7 (30.4%) 9 (39.1%)

Student / student communication

2.65 1.27 6 (26%) 3 (13%) 9 (39.1%) 3 (13%) 2 (8.7%)

For student research

3.70 0.93 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 5 (21.7%) 11 (47.8%) 4 (17.4%)

For assignments

3.83 0.98 0 (0%) 2 (8.7%) 7 (30.4%) 7 (30.4%) 7 (30.4%)

To remember & explain content

3.39 1.03 1 (4.3%) 3 (13%) 8 (34.8%) 8 (34.8%) 3 (13%)

To analyze & apply content

3.45 0.86 0 (0%) 2 (9.0%) 11 (50%) 6 (27%) 3 (14%)

To synthesize & evaluate content

3.35 0.88 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 12 (52.2%) 5 (21.7%) 3 (13%)

For remediation

3.04 1.26 3 (13%) 4 (17.4%) 9 (39.1%) 3 (13%) 4 (17.4%)

59


Table 2


Regarding How iPad Use Has Improved Student Learning

Variable M SD Strongly disagree

Disagree Have not seen a difference

Agree Strongly agree

Developed new ways of thinking

3.64 1.09 0 (0%) 5 (23%) 3 (14%) 9 (41%) 5 (23%)

Improved critical thinking skills

3.18 1.00 0 (0%) 6 (27%) 9 (41%) 4 (18%) 3 (14%)

Gather & organize information

0.83 1.03 0 (0%) 4 (17.4%) 2 (8.7%) 11 (47.8%) 6 (26%)

Explore new topics

4.27 1.24 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 2 (9%) 12 (55%) 6 (27.3%)

Become more creative

3.74 1.05 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 7 (30.4%) 6 (26%) 7 (30.4%)

Become more productive

3.48 1.20 1 (4.3%) 4 (17.4%) 7 (30.4%) 5 (21.7%) 6 (26%)

60


Table 3

Mean, Standard Deviation, Response Count, and Frequency for Administrator Survey Questions

Variable M SD Not at all Minimally Somewhat Signifi-cantly

Fully

Personal participation

4.13 1.13 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%)

Communication with stakeholders

4.13 0.83 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 2 (25%) 3 (37.5%) 3 (37.5%)

Promoted stakeholders participation

3.88 1.13 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 3(37.5%)

Aligned iPad plan with other school plans

3.50 1.20 1 (12.5%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%) 1(12.5%)

Depended on prior research-based practices

3.75 0.71 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (37.5%) 4 (50%) 1 (12.5%)

Studied best practices before implementation

4 0.53 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 6 (75%) 1 (12.5%)

Modeled best practices to faculty

3.88 1.25 1 (12.5%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (62.5%) 2 (25%)

Supported faculty who needed help

3.63 1.30 1 (12.5%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 3 (37.5%) 2 (25%)

Assessed staff needs re: professional development

3.12 1.46 2 (25%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 3 (37.5%) 1 (12.5%)

Ensured professional development

3.75 1.74 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 2 (25%) 3 (37.5%) 2 (25%)

61


for staff

Participated in professional development

3.75 0.71 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (37.5%) 4 (50%) 1 (12.5%)

Allocated discretionary funds to program

3.25 1.58 2 (25%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%)

Pursued supplemental funding for program

2.63 1.41 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%)

Ensured upgrades were available

3.75 1.58 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 4 (50%)

Advocated for diocesan support

1.88 1.25 5 (62.5%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 1 (12.5%) 0 (0%)

Surveyed faculty on satisfaction with support

3.25 1.64 0 (0%) 3 (37.5%) 1 (12.5%) 3 (37.5%) 1 (12.5%)

Evaluated practices to assess program’s effectiveness

3.25 0.71 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 4 (50%) 3 (37.5%) 0 (0%)

Evaluated ongoing need of professional development

3.38 1.30 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 4 (50%) 1 (12.5%)

Implemented policies to teach ethical issues

3.13 0.83 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 3 (37.5%) 3 (37.5%) 0 (0%)

Enforced 2.86 0.99 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 4 (50%) 2 (25%) 0 (0%)

62


copyright laws

Addressed privacy & online safety

3.5 0.93 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 3 (37.5%) 3 (37.5%) 1 (12.5%)

Shared information on health & technology

1.75 1.04 5 (50%) 0 (0%) 3 (37.5%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

63


Table 4


Variable M SD Strongly disagree



Had improved between students

3.26 0.69 0 (0%) 2 (8.7%) 14 (60.9%) 6 (26%) 1 (4.3%)

Had improved between teachers & students

3.48 0.90 0 (0%) 4 (17.4%) 6 (26%) 11 (47.8%) 2 (8.7%)

Increased face-to-face student interaction

2.91 0.61 0 (0%) 5 (21.7%) 14 (60.9%) 3 (13%) 0 (0%)

Increased face-to-face individual instruction

3.05 0.65 0 (0%) 4 (17.4%) 13 (56.5%) 5 (21.7%) 0 (0%)

64


Table 5

Correlation Coefficients for Amount of iPad Use for Communication and the Perceived Effect of

the 1:1 iPad Program on Relationships

Variable Time spent using iPads for teacher / student communication

Perceived effect of program on teacher / students relations

Time spent using iPads for teacher / student communication

1 --

Perceived effect on teacher/student relationships

0.88 1

65


Table 6

Correlation Coefficients for Amount of iPad Use for Communication and the Effect of the 1:1

iPad Program on relationships

Variable Time spent using iPads for student / student communication

Perceived effect of program on student / student relations

Time spent using iPads for student / student communication

1 --

Perceived effect of program on student / student relations

0.79 1

66


Table 7

Correlation Coefficients for the iPad Program’s ability to Help Teachers Be More Productive

and the Increase of Face-to-Face Student Interaction

Variable Teachers are more productive Perceived increase in face-to-face interaction

Teachers are more productive 1 --

Perceived increase in face-to-face interaction

0.80 1

67


Appendix A

Survey Instrument for Teachers

1. How often do you use the iPad for teacher-student communications (e.g., response to written work, posting schedules and activities)?

Not at all Rarely Occasionally Very often Extremely often

2. How often do you use the iPad for student-to-student communication?


3. How often do you require the use of the iPad for student research?


4. How often do you require students to use the iPad to complete assignments?


5. How often do you use the iPad to help students remember and explain content?


6. How often do you use the iPad to help students analyze and apply content?


7. How often do you use the iPad to help students synthesize and evaluate content?


8. How often do you use the iPad for remediation?


68


9. The implementation of the 1:1 iPad program has helped students to develop new way of thinking.


10. The implementation of the 1:1 iPad program has helped students to develop critical thinking skills.


11. The implementation of the 1:1 iPad program has helped students to gather and organize information.


12. The implementation of the 1:1 iPad program has helped students explore topics.


13. The implementation of the 1:1 iPad program has helped students to become more creative.


14. The implementation of the 1:1 iPad program has helped students to be more productive.


15. The 1:1 iPad program has helped me to...

A. Integrate different aspects of the curriculum

Strongly disagree

Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree

69


B. Teach innovatively Strongly disagree


C. Direct student learning

Strongly disagree


D. Model an idea or activity

Strongly disagree


E. Connect the curriculum to real world tasks

Strongly disagree


F. Be more productive

Strongly disagree


16. Prior to the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program, indicate how much technology professional development you received during the school year:

A single day Multiple days

A semester A year

17. Prior to the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program, indicate what type of technology professional development you received during the last school year:

Continuation of technology professional development from previous years

Didactic Interactive Collabora-tive

Experi-mental

18. Prior to the implementati n of the 1:1 iPad program, indicate to what extent your technology professional development involved content directly linked to your curriculum:


70


19. Prior to the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program, indicate to what extent your technology professional development helped you to:

A. Manage the classroom while using technology

Not at all Minimally Somewhat Significa-ntly

B. Understand procedures for accessing technology resources


C. Troubleshoot technology problems


D. Access technology experts


E. Understand the school’s technology usage policies


20. Please evaluate your professional development experiences related to the 1:1 iPad program.

A. Instruction was Inadequate Somewhat inadequate

Adequate Good Superior

B. The connection to my curriculum was

Inadequate Somewhat inadequate


C. The documentation I was given was

Inadequate Somewhat inadequate


21. Please rate your

71


school in terms of the following:

A. Providing enough software

Very poor Poor Adequate Good Excellent

B. Choosing appropriate software


C. Engaging teachers in decisions about software purchases


D. Providing professional development for software use


22. The relationships between students have improved since the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program.

Strongly disagree



Please explain:

23. The relationships between students and teachers have improved since the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program.

Strongly disagree



Please explain:

24. The amount of face-to-face student interaction has increased since the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program.

Strongly disagree



25. The amount of Strongly Disagree Have not Agree Strongly

72


face-to-face individual instruction students receive from teachers has increased since the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program.

disagree seen a difference

agree

26. The 1:1 iPad program furthers the mission of the school.

Strongly disagree



Please explain:

27. In what subject area(s) do you currently teach? (Mark all that apply.)

Religion / Theology

English Math Science Social Studies

Foreign language

Fine arts Other

28. How many years have you been teaching?

1-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 16 or more

29. Are you willing to participate in a 30-minute phone interview?

Yes No

If yes, please provide an email address as contact information. As with this survey, all interview responses will remain anonymous.

Email address:

Appendix B

73


Survey Instrument for Administrators

1. To what extent did you participate in the implementation of your school’s 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all

Minimally Somewhat Significantly Fully

2. To what extent did you communicate information to your school's stakeholders regarding the planning of the 1:1 iPad program implementation?

Not at all


3. To what extent did you promote the participation of your school’s stakeholders in the planning of the 1:1 iPad program's implementation?

Not at all


4. To what extent did you compare and align your plan to implement the 1:1 iPad program with other plans, including diocesan strategic plans, your school improvement plan, or other instructional plans?

Not at all


5. To what extent did you depend on research based technology practices as you planned the implementation of your 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all


6. To what extent did you engage in activities to identify best practices in the use of a 1:1 iPad program (e.g. reviews of

Not at all


74


literature, attendance at relevant conferences, or meetings of professional organizations)?

7. To what extent did you disseminate or model best practices in learning and teaching with a 1:1 iPad plan to faculty and staff before its implementation?

Not at all


8. To what extent did you provide support (e.g., release time, budget allowance) to teachers or staff who were attempting to share information about 1:1 iPad program practices, issues, and concerns?

Not at all


9. To what extent did you organize or conduct assessments of staff needs related to professional development on the use a 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all


10. To what extent did you facilitate or ensure the delivery of professional development on the use a 1:1 iPad program to faculty and staff?

Not at all


11. To what extent did you participate in professional development activities designed for the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all


75


12. To what extent do you allocate campus discretionary funds to help meet the 1:1 iPad program's needs?

Not at all


13. To what extent do you pursue supplemental funding to help meet the needs of your 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all


14. To what extent did you ensure that hardware and software replacement/upgrades were incorporated into the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all


15. To what extent did you advocate at the diocesan level for adequate, timely, and highquality support services for the 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all


16. To what extent are you continuing to investigate how satisfied faculty and staff are with the technology support services provided by the school?

Not at all


17. To what extent are you promoting the evaluation of instructional practices with the 1:1iPad program to assess their effectiveness?

Not at all


76


18. To what extent are you continuing to evaluate the need of technology professional development to improve your 1:1 iPad program?

Not at all


19. To what extent did you implement policies or programs meant to raise and continue awareness of technology related social, ethical, and legal issues for staff and students?

Not at all


20. To what extent are you in involved in enforcing policies related to copyright and intellectual property?

Not at all


21. To what extent are you involved in addressing issues related to privacy and online safety?

Not at all


22. To what extent did you disseminate information about health concerns related to technology and computer usage in classrooms and offices?

Not at all


23. In order of importance, what were the three primary reasons for

77


the implementation of the 1:1 iPad program?

A.

B.

C.

24. To what extent does the 1:1 iPad program help your community to fulfill the mission statement of the school?

Please explain:

25. Are you willing to participate in a 30-minute phone interview?

Yes No

If yes, please provide an email address as contact information. As with this survey, all interview responses will remain anonymous.

Email address:

Appendix C

78


Semi-Structured Interview Protocol for Teachers

Location:

Date:

Interviewer:

Interviewee & position:

Interviewer: Before the interview begins, allow me to remind you of the purpose of this research

project. The purpose is to develop an effective technology plan with iPads in the

curricula of Pope John Paul the Great Catholic High School, in a way that fosters

interpersonal relationships and enhances student learning. Your responses will

remain confidential, but portions of your interview will be used in the final report.

May I have permission to record the interview?

Questions:

1. To what extent were you involved in the decision to implement a 1:1 iPad plan in your

school?

a. Was this a positive experience for you?

2. Will you please describe to me your experience of the professional development offered

in preparation for the new iPad plan?

a. What aspects did you find most helpful? Least helpful?

3. How would you describe the iPad plan’s initial effects on the school?

a. Will you please describe the transition?

4. How would you evaluate the quality of iPad apps designed for your content area?

5. What has your experience of teaching been like with the presence of the 1:1 iPad plan?

6. How has the plan affected your relationships with your students?

79


7. How has the plan affected your relationship with parents?

8. How has the plan affected the students’ relationships with each other?

9. Do you have any suggestions for other Catholic schools that are considering the

implementation of a 1:1 iPad plan?

10. Do you have anything else you would like to add?

Appendix D

80


Semi-Structured Interview Protocol for Administrators

Location:

Date:

Interviewer:

Interviewee & position:

Interviewer: Before the interview begins, allow me to remind you of the purpose of this

research project. The purpose is to develop an effective technology plan with iPads

in the curricula of Pope John Paul the Great Catholic High School, in a way that

fosters interpersonal relationships and enhances student learning. Your responses

will remain confidential, but portions of your interview will be used in the final

report.

May I have permission to record the interview?

Questions:

1. Why and how was the decision made to implement the iPad program?

2. What were the initial responses of the faculty? The parents? The students?

3. What approach did you take to professional development in order to prepare for the

implementation? How and why was this approach chosen?

4. How effective has the professional development been for the teachers?

5. How would you describe the iPad plan’s initial effects on the school?

a. Will you please describe the transition?

6. From your perspective, after the initial transition to the 1:1 plan, what has been the

experience of teachers?

7. How has the plan affected the quality of the school community and culture?

81


a. Faculty? Administration? Students? Parents?

8. How has the plan affected the teachers’ relationships with the administration?

9. How has the plan affected the teachers’ relationships with the students?

10. How has the plan affected the students’ relationships with each other?

11. How has the plan affected the teachers’ relationships with the parents?

12. Do you have any suggestions for other Catholic schools that are considering the

implementation of a 1:1 iPad plan?

13. Do you have anything else you would like to add?

82

Fonte_AR Final Final Draft 6-23-2014

Documents

Transcript of Fonte_AR Final Final Draft 6-23-2014