ICT Implementation to Improve Rural Students’ Achievement in Physics

Dionysios Trikoilis

Dionysios Trikoilis University of Nicosia

Abstract

Due to the challenges of the new era teachers enrich their teaching approaches with the implementation of ICT tools. Worldwide literature provides solid evidence underlying the potential of technology for supporting everyday teaching practice, providing an interactive teaching and learning environment. This quantitative small scale study describes the implementation of ICT in a teaching scenario in high school Physics. The scenario focused on a computer simulation about the uniformly accelerated linear motion and was the outcome of Distance-based instructional coaching (DBIC). The specific DBIC has been designed to support the professional development of rural science teachers. The scenario was presented to a class of twenty randomly selected tenth-grade level students of a Greek rural island, with great success. The benefits of applying the scenario are outlined not only through the satisfactory statistically significant student outcomes, but also through the student reflection that followed.

References

Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. (2012). Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge in pre‑service mathematics teachers through collaborative design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 547-564. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.827.

Aladejana, F., (2007). The Implications of ICT and NKS for Science Teaching: Whither Nigeria. Ile-Ife: Complex Systems Publications, Inc.

Barrett A, Ali S, Clegg J, Hinostroza EJ, Lowe J, Nikel J, Novelli M, Oduro G, Pillay M, Tikly L, Yu G (2007). Initiatives to improve the quality of teaching and learning: A review of recent literature. EdQual Working paper no. 11. Bristol: EdQual.
Batuyong, C. T., & Antonio, V. V. (2018). Exploring the effect of PhET® interactive simulation-based activities on students’ performance and learning experiences in electromagnetism. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 6(2), 121–131.
Bell, R. L., & Smetana, L. K. (2008). Using computer simulations to enhance science teaching and learning. In R. L. Bell, J. Gess-Newsome, & J. Luft (Eds.), Technology in the secondary science classroom (pp. 23-32). Washington, D. C.: National Science Teachers Association Press.
Esquembre, F. (2002). Computers in physics education. Computer Physics Communications, 147(1-2), 13-18.
Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: how children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books Inc.
Gentry, L. B., Denton, C. A., & Kurz, T. (2008). Technologically-based mentoring provided to teachers: A synthesis of the literature. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(3), 339– 373.
Hellsten, L. M., McIntyre, L. J., & Prytula, M. P. (2011). Teaching in Rural Saskatchewan: First Year Teachers Identify Challenges and Make Recommendations. Rural Educator, 32(3), 11–21.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2003). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54.
Jimoyiannis, A., & Komis, V. (2001). Computer Simulations in Physics Teaching and Learning: A Case Study on Students’ Understanding of Trajectory motion. Computers and Education, 36(2), 183–204.
Kunz, G. M., Nugent, G. C., DeChenne, S. E., Houston, J., & Pedersen, J. (2013). Meeting rural science teachers’ needs: Professional development with on-going technology-delivered instructional coaching. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Lee, S. C., Nugent, G., Kunz, G. M., Houston, J., & DeChenne-Peters, S. (2018). Case study: Value-added benefit of distance-based instructional coaching on science teachers’ inquiry instruction in rural schools. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(3), 179-199.
Mallari, R. L., & Lumanog, G. D. (2020). The effectiveness of integrating PhET interactive simulation-based activities in improving the student’s academic performance in science. International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology, 8(9), 1150-1153.
Marlow, D., & Cooper, M. (2008). The MetLife survey of the American teacher: Past, present, and future. (Report No. ED504457). New York, NY: Metlife.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 31–48). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
McCoy, L. P. (2006). Southern rural public schools: A study of teacher perspectives. Qualitative Report, 11(4), 749–763.
McGatha, M. (2008). Levels of engagement in establishing coaching relationships. Teacher Development, 12(2), 139–150. doi:10.1080/13664530802038147
Newton, L.R., & Rogers, L., (2003). Thinking frameworks for planning ICT in science lessons. School Science Review, 84(309), 1-8.
Podolefsky N. S., Perkins K. K., & Adams W. K. (2010). Factors promoting engaged exploration with computer simulations. Physics Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 6(2), 020117.
Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Gable, R. A., & Zigmond, N. P. (2009). Virtual coaching for novice teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(2), 36–41.
White, S., Lock, G., Hastings, W., Cooper, M., Reid, J., & Green, B. (2011). Investing in sustainable and resilient rural social space: Lessons for teacher education, Education in Rural Australia, 21 (2), 67-78.