Project RITE

This study provided further evidence that concerns can provide useful insight into reasons for the continuing resistance to changes involving technology. “Teacher resistance to change is primarily due to their concerns regarding the influence of instructional technology integration on their preparation, beliefs, and values (Wetzel, 2002, p. 43). Within the Concerns-Based Adoption Model, school leaders can identify teachers’ concerns and use the data to design professional development that will lead them forward.
Teachers who expressed higher-level concerns toward technology also described their classroom practices as being more constructivist in nature. Teachers’ classroom behaviors reflect their beliefs about the nature of teaching and learning (Pajares, 1992). Professional development opportunities that encourage teachers to reflect on the relationship between their own beliefs about successful instructional practices and the theoretical benefits of an innovation such as the use of technology can reduce the perception of incompatibility and increase the likelihood of effective use of technology (Koszalka, 2003).

Respondents were provided with the opportunity to respond to a question that asked, “What specific concerns do you have about the use of technology in your classroom?” About one-third of the respondents chose to answer this open-ended question (n=35). Responses provided the respondents an opportunity to provide additional information regarding their use of technology beyond the items in the questionnaire.
Content analysis was used to analyze the text provided in the open-ended responses. Four categories of comments emerged. Each comment was coded and assigned to the appropriate category. Respondent comments are summarized.

Category    n    percent

Lack of access to resources     9    25
Lack of technical support /
Technical problems    14    38

Lack of time    6    17
Lack of effective training    6    17
____________________________________________________________________________
NOTE: Individual respondents may have included multiple statements that fit into more than one category.

One way of analyzing group concerns is to aggregate individual data by developing a profile that provides the average scores for each stage of the individuals in a group. Group averages reflect the dominant high and low Stages of Concern of the entire group. Mean scores were converted to percentiles and plotted following the procedures outlined by George, Hall, and Stiegelbauer (2006) using the SoCQ Quick Scoring Device. The first and the second highest stages of concern for all respondents are typically analyzed along with the lowest stage of concern. Identification of the second highest stage of concerns along with the peak stage makes possible a more in-depth interpretation of the concerns of the group.

In this sample, Stages 0, 1, 2 and 5 were all within one or two percentile points. All four were, therefore, interpreted as the highest concerns. It is not unusual for Stages 1 and 2 to be similar in a nonuser profile such as this. Although distinct stages, Stages 1 and 2 (Informational and Personal) concerns frequently occur at the same time.
The raw score for each of the seven scales is the sum of the responses to the five statements on that scale (see Appendix B). The mean scores were determined for each item. The mean scores were then converted to percentile scores. The percentiles are not absolute, but should be viewed as relative to other scores that an individual or group.

Percentiles for Each of the Stages of Concern

Stage 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Percentile 86 84 85 69 63 84 77

In summary, the aggregate data for this sample presents an overall profile of a group of teachers who are not currently making real use of technology. High levels of “self” concerns are preventing most in the group from moving to higher-level concerns that leave them more open to the effective use of technology. The self concerns are preventing group members from concentrating on the effects of technology use on their students and preventing them from moving forward and using technology in more cooperative, advanced ways. In essence, the intense self concerns have paralyzed their progress.