Technology Integration in Special Education: K–5 Teacher Perceptions

Introduction

Technology is an integral part of society. Students learn through the use of technology such as personal computers, tablets, and e-books (Garland & Tadeja, 2013). Computers can provide access to videos, documents, and other forms of data that students may absorb through visual or auditory methods. Tablets provide the same access through a lightweight, touch-responsive interface. Technology investment within schools not only enables varied learning opportunities for students, but it also helps students discover or improve their own ability to research and analyze information, collaborate and communicate, and solve problems (Lim, Zhao, Tondeur, Chai, & Tsai, 2013).

Integrating technology in schools, especially in areas like special education, enables staff to develop new ways of teaching and to create curriculum customized for students with special needs. Fernandez-Lopez, Rodriguez-Fortiz, Rodriguez-Almendros, and Martinez-Segura (2013) stated, "The development of customizable and adaptable applications tailored to them provides many benefits as it helps mold the learning process to different cognitive, sensorial or mobility impairments" (p. 77). Teachers have the option of constructing lessons using videos, pictures, and slide shows to allow a diverse array of teaching methods. From the use of visual aids to increasing the size of text and making text colorful and appealing, technology makes instruction more accessible. Digital textbooks, for example, allow students access to homework and lessons from the convenience of a mobile device or laptop (Orey, Jones, & Branch, 2013).

The addition of digital textbooks in schools allows for greater student freedom and the ability to take schoolwork wherever they go. In the case of special education students, some remain homebound for extended periods of time. If they have access to digital textbooks, they can have text enlarged, study from home, and collect information for study at their own pace. Technology allows for customization of lesson plans, which enables a better learning experience for special education students who often require individualized approaches for academic success. Without the use of technology, special education students have limited options.

Barriers still exist in terms of technology and teaching, and this is especially true for special education (Cornelius & Nagro, 2014). Special education teachers may integrate some aspects of technology into their curriculum, but some remain resistant, believing technology integration is unnecessary. Schools may be at fault because of the continued lack of policy changes and training for special education teachers. Students with learning disabilities—the majority of special education students—require additional instruction and varied teaching methods (Fernandez-Lopez, Rodriguez-Fortiz, Rodriguez-Almendros, & Martinez-Segura, 2013).

If schools integrate the use of technology in special education, every special needs student will be able to receive a varied and customizable curriculum that may lead, in the long run, to a higher quality of education, as evidenced by outcomes in distance and online learning (Abrami, Bernard, Bures, Borokhovski, & Tamim, 2012). While technology in schools may seem like a recent endeavor, the transition from technology-free to technology-centric classrooms has been underway for over four decades (Keengwe, 2015). In these four decades, many schools have made great strides. Even so, some teachers remain resistant to technology integration.

Research notes that teachers' attitudes toward technology represent the main barrier to integration. "Teachers' own beliefs and attitudes about the relevance of technology to students' learning were perceived as having the biggest impact on their success" (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Sadik, Sendurur, & Sendurur, 2012, p. 423). If teachers believe they do not need technology to instruct students, or feel they are unable to use technology effectively, they may become more resistant to integration—especially if they perceive technology as a barrier rather than a teaching aid (Kim, Kim, Lee, Spector, & Demeester, 2013). It is therefore up to schools to expand teachers' perspectives on these attitudes and to support technology use through additional training with computers and projectors, and by recognizing teachers who do integrate technology into their curriculum.

In the case of special education and elementary students, many already have a harder time learning from traditionally designed curriculum (Carnahan & Fulton, 2013). If teachers utilize technology to customize curriculum for their special needs students, they will find greater success in teaching. Technology enables a hands-on approach and a greater implementation of visual aids that promotes higher levels of student engagement (Nam, Bahn, & Lee, 2013). Assistive technology is something many special education teachers use in order to help children learn. Audiobooks, for example, are an excellent illustration of how technology helps students who may have difficulty reading or a visual disability still learn with ease.

In this qualitative case study, the researcher will interview 15 special education teachers from 15 various elementary schools within Miami-Dade County, Florida. Because attitudes and perceptions play such a major role in whether teachers use technology in the classroom, this study will examine the attitudes and perceptions of 15 special education teachers as they relate to technology integration in daily general instruction, including science, math, history, and English. Perceptions can include viewing technology as an insurmountable obstacle or seeing it as a hindrance rather than a teaching aid. Participants will be chosen from K–5 schools within the Miami-Dade school district. Although the district has 200 elementary schools and many have integrated technology successfully, the need to assess daily integration practices and teacher attitudes has not been fully addressed.

Selection of schools will be based on availability and location. Schools must be within the Miami-Dade school district, serve grades K–5, have a special education or inclusion program, maintain some level of technology integration, and have access to email communication.

Special education teachers in an urban K–5 school district face difficulties fully integrating technology into their daily instruction, largely due to funding constraints (Snodgrass, Israel, & Reese, 2016). This is not simply a Florida problem—it is a challenge seen across the country. While some schools use tablets, smartboards, video or virtual conferencing, and assistive technology such as audiobooks, others have retained the traditions and practices of the past. Gold (2014) notes the lack of technology available in some schools, while others have student-accessible websites and dedicated technology departments. Special education is an area that particularly needs a higher level of technology integration—including student access to school websites for additional learning materials and daily lessons, availability of digital texts and audiobooks, and access to better assistive technology like tablets. Special needs students may not be able to attend school every day or learn effectively from traditional instructional methods, and technology may open options that were not previously available to them.

Problem Statement

Students with disabilities vary widely. Some have mild learning disabilities; others have severe disabilities that affect their ability to communicate, walk, or perform other daily functions. Approximately 60% of students in special education have some type of learning disability or emotional problem (Aitken, Fairley, & Carlson, 2012). Technology assists by offering options to special needs students. Word processing software, for example, allows text to be enlarged, colored, and emphasized in ways that capture a student's attention. Slideshows allow for the use of visual aids. The internet gives teachers access to the most current educational resources (Wilmore, 2013). However, technology integration is not the only aspect of special education that requires improvement.

Research shows that teachers may not willingly integrate technology into their daily instruction because of certain attitudes and perceptions (Vincenti, Buciero, & Vaz de Carvalho, 2014), which often stem from a lack of training (Keengwe, Onchwari, & Hucks, 2013). In order for schools to integrate technology more effectively, they must first train teachers on how to use technology in the classroom. Special education teachers already face complex responsibilities in teaching students with varied disabilities and impairments; they require further training to understand how to implement technology to support student learning.

Aside from training, schools must evaluate how well special education teachers manage technology integration and whether such integration improves student learning outcomes. With schools required to demonstrate positive student performance to receive government funding under the No Child Left Behind Act, it became increasingly important to produce positive test results. If technology integration demonstrates that students learn more and score better on standardized tests, this would provide compelling evidence that technology integration should be a primary focus.

Assessment is an important part of any change. Evaluating the results of technology integration in several ways will allow for accurate interpretation:

1. Determining whether special education teachers have effectively integrated technology use;
2. Determining whether successful integration has led to improved student learning outcomes;
3. Determining whether special education teachers find teaching easier through the use of technology.

By evaluating the responses of special education teachers regarding their attempts at technology integration in daily instruction, a clearer picture emerges of the struggles and perceived barriers, as well as what does work in relation to technology integration. Both teachers and students stand to benefit from full technology integration, and through assessment and analysis, schools can achieve positive outcomes.

The purpose of this qualitative case study is to examine how K–5 special education teachers in Miami-Dade County perceive the process of technology integration within their school and district. One special education teacher from each of 15 elementary schools in Miami-Dade County will be observed and then interviewed in order to collect qualitative data concerning perceptions of technology integration in daily instruction. As one study noted, ease of use promotes positive attitudes toward change and integration among special education teachers: "Facilitating condition was strongly related to perceived ease of use, whereas perceived ease of use had a significant effect on computer self-efficacy" (Nam, Bahn, & Lee, 2013, p. 365).

Purpose, Nature, and Research Questions

This study will provide answers about what level of technology integration special education teachers in Miami-Dade County have achieved and whether those levels reflect national averages. Special education is changing, and this study will examine whether special education teachers in Miami-Dade County are keeping pace with those changes.

The research method for this case study will be qualitative. Qualitative information provides clarity on complex, difficult-to-interpret problems. By examining how special education teachers perceive technology integration, the study will either refute or support existing assumptions—for example, the assumption that negative attitudes toward technology integration are rooted in lack of training. By interviewing special education teachers and analyzing their responses, this factor can be confirmed or eliminated as a primary barrier. Miami-Dade County has one of the largest school districts in the country, making a qualitative examination of technology integration particularly valuable for understanding district-wide effectiveness.

The following questions will guide this qualitative case study:

1. How do special education teachers in Miami-Dade County public elementary schools perceive the potential of technology integration as it relates to daily instruction?
2. To what extent have special education teachers in Miami-Dade County public elementary schools used technology in their daily instruction?
3. What support do special education teachers receive from Miami-Dade County Public Schools?

Literature Review: Technology Integration

Originally outlined in 2006 by Matthew Koehler and Punya Mishra, TPACK builds on the foundational work of Shulman, who argued that content knowledge devoid of pedagogical skill would not help develop effective teachers. Koehler and Mishra expanded on this by adding a technological component and elevating it as the central focus. "This necessitates that the teacher looks further than technical aspects and considers the importance of the interplay of technology knowledge and pedagogical knowledge" (Ma, Yuen, Park, Lau, & Deng, 2015, p. 220). Furthermore, "Quality teaching requires developing nuanced understanding of complex relationships between technology, content, and pedagogy, and using this understanding to develop appropriate context-specific strategies and representations" (Ma, Yuen, Park, Lau, & Deng, 2015, p. 220). By placing emphasis on the technological component, there is an increased need to develop the skills required to make technology integration feasible for all teachers, and especially for special education teachers.

ICT (Information and Communication Technology): A broad term that describes the merging of networking, telecommunications technologies, and information into a single technology infrastructure. Many researchers find ICT proficiency low in technology-poor countries and note that organizational culture influences both technology proficiency and integration (Tong, Tak, & Wong, 2015).

Integration of Technology: "Level 0 is non-use, Level 1 as awareness, Level 2 as exploration, Level 3 as infusion, Level 4A as mechanical integration, Level 4B as routine integration, Level 5 as expansion, and Level 6 as refinement" (Beycioglu, 2013, p. 181).

Teachers' Technology Proficiency: "Levels 0–2 = indications of low comfort/skill, Levels 3–5 = indications of moderate comfort/skill, and Levels 6–7 = indications of high comfort/skill" (Beycioglu, 2013, p. 181).

Several assumptions were made for the purpose of this qualitative case study:

1. Findings from the qualitative study will provide clarity on what may cause lack of technology integration for special education teachers.
2. Lack of training leads to perceived barriers related to technology integration.
3. Negative beliefs, perceptions, and attitudes toward technology affect technology integration for special education teachers.
4. Study findings may lead to improvement in strategies adopted to increase technology integration among special education teachers.
5. Participants in the qualitative case study may either support or oppose technology integration.
6. The current body of research will provide supplementary information to guide the evaluation process.

Several limitations will exist within this qualitative case study. The first is researcher bias and its potential influence on the examination and interpretation of study findings. To reduce this limitation, no interference will be given when asking questions of participants. Participants will receive objective questions free from personal bias, and their answers will be recorded without cues or interjections. The second limitation is the restricted range of potential participants. Only special education teachers in public elementary schools will be selected, removing the potential for variety in the sample and producing a narrowed view of the issue. This limitation is further compounded by the exclusion of other school districts.

The scope of this qualitative case study will be delimited to qualitative data collection methods consisting of participant interviews, document review, and a defined geographic area. This will result in a small sample size compared to similar studies conducted in schools with broader age ranges and multiple school districts. While generalization is possible in qualitative research, it was not the goal of this study.

Special needs students face many challenges as they grow and develop. However, technology may ease some of these difficulties. This literature review focuses on three main areas: technology integration, teachers and technology, and how technology improves special education. It is intended to provide insight into what causes problems in schools related to technology integration and what can be done to improve integration rates. The review also addresses how technology improves special education and makes it easier to address the needs of special education students through technological innovation.

Technological innovations brought about through mobile and tablet technology can make learning easier due to portability (Hill, 2014). Social media also represents a form of technological innovation. Connecting with students is possible with a click of a button thanks to platforms like Instagram and Facebook, where students can join classroom groups or view pictures and videos related to their area of study and form discussions based on their observations (Hill, 2014). This is just a small sample of the options available in classrooms with full technology integration. In order to get technology adapted into more schools, teachers must be trained to become familiar with technology integration.

This literature review will examine how teacher training can evolve to include technology integration and what benefits result from such changes. It will also explore the TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework and its contribution to special education and technology integration. Additional areas of coverage will include the role of technology in special education and the implications of these changes as special education integrates more fully with regular education and its objectives—including the adoption of technology.

Technology integration has become a goal for many schools, particularly those focused on early education (Tondeur, Pareja Roblin, van Braak, Voogt, & Prestridge, 2016). One 2016 study recognized the need to train teachers in order to increase rates of technology integration in the classroom and also explored how beginning teachers integrated technology into their curriculum and practice, allowing researchers to draw a connection between technology use and pre-service education programs. Such findings may aid in creating improved pre-service programs and highlight the importance of implementing technology integration at the pre-service level.

The results of the literature review revealed "that all beginning teachers used a wide range of technological applications, mainly for structured learning approaches, while few created opportunities for student-centred technology use. Further, pre-service learning experiences that impact graduate teachers' technology use were identified" (Tondeur, Pareja Roblin, van Braak, Voogt, & Prestridge, 2016, p. 1). These conclusions help identify the significance of teacher educators modeling technology use as a central motivator for beginning teachers. Field experiences were identified as the most critical factor influencing a teacher's current practice (Tondeur et al., 2016), suggesting that field experiences and technology integration may be productively combined in redesigned pre-service programs.

Pre-service programs require student-centered technology use and technology modeling by teacher educators, allowing pre-service teachers to familiarize themselves with the various ways technology can be used in their classrooms (Tondeur et al., 2016). Without this foundational exposure to technology during the pre-service phase, teachers may experience confusion, misuse, or avoidance of technology once they begin teaching (Keengwe, Onchwari, & Hucks, 2013).

One recognized gap in research is the intersection of special education and technology (Istenic Starcic & Bagon, 2013). Researchers noted the lack of attention paid to ICT-supported learning for students with special needs or disabilities. There are three categories that make up ICT tools: Input, Output, and Others. "Research and development of information and communication technology (ICT)-supported learning for people with disabilities has not received adequate attention. It is also difficult to access research findings and developments in this field" (Istenic Starcic & Bagon, 2013, p. 202). Istenic Starcic and Bagon (2013) sought to identify where researchers were focusing their time on ICT-supported learning research and found that nearly half (49%) of research in this area consisted of descriptive articles.

Descriptive articles raise awareness of topics and communicate possible needs and findings through research; however, they do not offer the kind of information schools need to adopt policy changes because they lack the research and observation necessary to form precise or thorough conclusions (Istenic Starcic & Bagon, 2013; Thomas, 2013). The fact that descriptive articles make up the bulk of coverage on technology and special education may explain why technology integration in special education appears to advance slowly over the years. What is needed, as Istenic Starcic and Bagon (2013) indicate, are more studies and reviews that clarify what works and what does not in technology integration. This will then support a better understanding of the steps needed to achieve change at both the policy and implementation levels.