Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research

2012, Vol. 7, 6479

ISSN: 1935-3308

Empowering Educators through

Teacher Research: Promoting Qualitative
Inquiry among K-12 Educators
E. Jason Clarke

Colorado State University

The desire to find pedagogically effective uses of technology in K-12 education has exposed the need for reliable professional development programs
that empower teachers to identify the problems and needs they have in
their classrooms, apply a process of systematic inquiry in order to discover
solutions to those problems, and to share those findings with other teachers in their departments, schools, districts, and around the world. This
qualitative study of 37 team leaders who each led groups of 4-6 educators through a professional development program designed to promote
teacher research-based qualitative inquiry at a large Colorado school district found that the program empowered educators, promoted the effective
use of technology, helped motivate and engage students, and through each
participants teacher research report, produced valuable qualitative data.

T
he twenty-first century has brought about
dramatic changes in education. A new generation of teachers and students enter our schools
with different expectations and ideas regarding
the use of technology. Kuttan and Peters (2003)
argued that the changes in our society brought
about by the advent of the internet are comparable to those brought about by the invention
of the printing press in their scope and magnitude. These dramatic and fundamental changes in our society demand equally fundamental
changes in our education practices. Howland
(2009) pointed out the importance of educators

E. Jason Clarke is a Doctoral Student in the School
of Education at Colorado State University in Fort Collins,
Colorado.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to eclarke@psdschools.org.

adapting their practice to address this societal

shift and argued that the failure to use educational technology in our schools due to nostalgia and intransigence on the part of educators
amounts to professional malpractice. Indeed,
the use of technology is a defining characteristic of twenty-first century education (Goddard,
2002) and should be required of contemporary
educators (McKenzie, 2002) if the United States
is going to compete in the twenty-first century
globalized economy (Friedman, 2007).
Despite the overwhelming evidence of the
need for technology in our classrooms, there are
clear indications that educators are not using
technology as often, or as effectively, as might
be hoped. Lowther, Inan, Strahl, and Ross
(2008) cited a study by the United States Department of Commerce showing that among 55
identified industry sectors in the United States,
education is the least technology-intensive. If
schools are supposed to prepare students for

65

work in twenty-first century industries, they

clearly are far behind in adopting and using
technology-centered practices in daily classroom instruction. Students moving from lowtech schools into high-tech industries are likely to have serious deficiencies in their skill sets
when employers ask them to apply technology
solutions. Goddard (2002) argued that discomfort in new situations is natural for human beings, which might explain Christensens (2002)
and OHanlons (2009) observations of teachers resistance to adding technology into their
instruction. To further document this technology deficiency, Nuckols (2008) and Thompson
(2005) argued that a majority of teachers only
have basic technology skills and that while they
can use grade book programs and send and receive emails, the majority of educators lack adequate twenty-first century skills.
There is broad consensus in the literature
that if professional development is to effectively promote the use of educational technology,
it must empower teachers and respect them as
capable professionals. For example, Goddard
(2002) argued that attempting to force or require teachers to adopt technology programs
can backfire. Hall and Elliot (2003) argued that
effective technology implementation can be accomplished most effectively in a flexible environment that encourages individual approaches to technology. Heydon and Hibbert (2010)
advocated professional development programs
that utilize a variety of resources based on the
situation at hand rather than forcing educators
to focus on a limited number of prescribed programs and products. Nuckols (2008) rejected
command and control leadership as a strategy
for motivating teachers. OHanlon (2009) offered evidence that teachers forced to adopt
technology programs are more likely to resist,
and Lowther et al. (2008) argued that teachers who perceive that they have no choice in
adopting technology programs are less likely
to make a rigorous effort to do so. The idea
that leaders can simply fiat the use of technology by ordering teachers to increase their use of
technology in the classroom is therefore highly
questionable.
On the other hand, educators empowered
and respected as professionals are more likely to make innovative changes in their practice
and find ways to incorporate technology into

Clarke
their teaching practice. Bolman and Deal (2008)
argued that teachers are professionals, and that
they work best in environments in which they
have autonomy and can make their own judgments concerning the best ways for students to
learn. Amankwatia (2008), OHanlon (2009),
and Nuckols (2008) all argued in favor of democratic, cooperative models for the implementation of technology programs; teachers who are
treated as professionals and integrated as collaborative partners in technology program design and implementation are more likely to
buy into the process and will be more effective
at putting those principles into practice. Hall
and Elliot (2003) and Sherry, Billig, and Tavalin (2000) emphasized the importance of sharing specific best practices with colleagues and
encouraged making the teacher a co-learner in
a collaborative training environment. In addition, Amankwatia (2008), Nuckols (2008),
and OHanlon (2009) all advocated experiential, long-term training that provides teachers
with opportunities to share, experiment, practice, and gradually develop as education technologists rather than one-shot trainings that address general, abstract ideas and do not provide
continuing opportunities for experimentation,
learning, and practice. School leaders must
find and implement long-term professional development programs that empower teachers to
find innovative and creative ways to use technology in order to meet the individual needs of
their students so that our schools can start addressing the needs of the twenty-first century
workplace.

The rise of the information age in the twenty-first century necessitates the use of technology in the classroom in order to adequately
prepare students for the work they will be expected to do. Unfortunately, education continues its bound practice of only using low tech
measures and teachers continue their lack of incorporating technology into their daily teaching
practice. Therefore, it is imperative that school
leaders find collaborative and democratic professional development programs that empower teachers to experiment, find innovative ways
to use technology, and share their best practices as part of ongoing, long-term, and experiential learning opportunities that promote the
use of educational technology in the classroom.
Teacher research is one very promising program

Empowering Educators through Teacher Research

that may meet this need for empowering professional development. MacLean and Mohr (1999)
defined teacher research as the cultivation of
the principles of qualitative scientific inquiry
among educators in order to empower them to
find data-driven and classroom-tested solutions
for solving the pressing problems they identify
in their own classrooms. White (2011) observed
that teacher research is one of the most celebrated developments in teacher education and
professional development to emerge in recent
decades because it empowers teachers, and
encourages innovation and creativity to solve
problems.
While an emergent body of literature exists
about the effectiveness of teacher research as
a professional development strategy for educators (e.g. White, 2011), a lack of discussion still
exists about how teacher research could result
in more infusion of educational technology in
the classroom to meet the needs of twenty-first
century learners. My goal in pursuing this line
of inquiry was to examine the potential impact
of teacher research as a professional development strategy in order to promote the effective
use of technology in the classroom and to begin to help fill that gap in the existing literature. The most promising new professional development innovation to come along in recent
decades should naturally and appropriately be
applied to the most pressing need in presentday education, but little knowledge is currently available about how effective such a program
might be.

The purpose of the present study was to examine one program that was designed to marry the principles of qualitative teacher research
with the need to promote technology among
classroom teachers in order to explore how effective the program is in promoting the use of
technology among classroom educators. Specifically, I gathered and analyzed extensive data in
order to assess the impact of the Digital Learning Collaborative (DLC) and applied qualitative
research methods within a constructivist paradigm in order to examine the lived experiences
of participant teachers and to evaluate whether
the program meets the needs identified in the
literature for an effective educational technology professional development program.

66

Method
I applied qualitative methods consistent
with those described as constructivist with
the intention of recording the lived experiences of participants and evaluating the perceived
impact of the program on participant expertise with and use of educational technology.
My goal was to produce contextual knowledge
based on patterns that emerged from the qualitative observations I made through an interactive discourse with program participants. Consistent with the constructivist paradigm, I did
not want my preconceived values to be hidden
or disguised behind an assumed veil of artificial
neutrality (Lincoln, Lynham, & Guba, 2003).
Instead, I asserted that the values of democracy and individual empowerment were central
to the development of my research questions,
method, analysis, findings, and conclusions.
My intent was to bring attention to the reader
that in my own subjective and context-bound
judgment, based on my experiences as a school
teacher, a lifelong student, and a human being,
that these values inform my opinion of what is
good and what is effective in the field of education for both students and teachers. Oppression and control are dehumanizing to individuals who find their perspectives devalued, beliefs
degraded, and best interests undermined for the
benefit of the powerful in systems that are not
based on democratic principles. Locating this
study within the constructivist paradigm enabled me to examine the impact of the program
on my participants who I perceived as human
beings with emotions, values, varied experiences, and complex motivations and goals, not
merely objectified and quantified units of productivity to be impartially measured in order to
determine the quantity of their output for the
sole benefit of my research agenda. It was for
this reason that I chose to frame my findings
through a discussion of the participants specific words and writings. Thus, although the
findings may not adhere to the conventional
scientific standards of external validity and objectivity, they are consistent with Lincoln et al.s
(2003) quality criteria of trustworthiness and
authenticity.

Program Description and Participants

The
Digital
Learning
Collaborative
(DLC), a teacher research based professional

67

development program, was implemented in a

large Colorado school district among a self-selected group of 24 classroom teachers, each of
whom led a team of 4-6 teacher researchers at
their home schools. By forming teams of researchers at their home schools, the influence
of the DLC spread beyond the primary participants, which expanded the influence of the
program within the district. Participants were
self-selected based on their interest in pursuing educational technology professional development credits, and received a small stipend for
their participation in the program. The program
is designed to provide motivated K-12 educators with an opportunity to pursue professional development aimed at promoting educational technology, and uninterested teachers are not
required to participate. The program facilitators
assert that this self-selection increases participating teachers buy-in and helps ensure that
teachers have a positive and open-minded attitude from the beginning of the program.

A team of four teacher researchers from the
Colorado State University Writing Project (CSUWP) in consultation with Cindy ODonnell-Allen, Associate Professor of English at Colorado
State University, developed and implemented
the year-long teacher research program, which
began in the second year of teacher participation in the DLC. In total, three cohorts participated in the program throughout a three-year
period. The present study focuses on the second cohort and included 200 participants in 37
teams across 20 schools. The program of teacher-directed and teacher-implemented qualitative inquiry draws heavily in its design from
Teacher-Researchers at Work (MacLean & Mohr,
1999) and is based in the tradition of teacher research as an empowering mechanism for educators to learn how to apply systematic inquiry to their practice in order to generate genuine
research questions, gather and analyze data,
share findings, and propagate best practices.
The goal of the program is to teach team leaders
the principles and methods of qualitative teacher research and to help them design, develop,
conduct, analyze, and share a year-long study
at their home school, giving them applied and
experiential practice in using the techniques
of teacher research to develop and share best
practices.

Clarke
The year-long teacher research portion of
the program included nine monthly meetings.
The first meeting lasted two full days and team
leaders learned the philosophy, methods, and
strategies of teacher research. After the initial
meeting, team leaders met once a month in the
evening after school in order to receive ongoing
instructions, get structured work time, and ask
questions and seek clarification as their research
projects unfolded. The final meeting of the year
included an opportunity to present the results
of each team leaders teacher research project
to the entire group of team leaders, the program
facilitators, and interested district employees.
This program meets the criteria identified in the
literature for an ongoing, experiential, participatory, collaborative and empowering program
of professional development with opportunities
to share best practices (Amankwatia, 2008; Nuckols, 2008; OHanlon, 2009).

Data Collection and Sampling

I collected qualitative data through observations, interviews, surveys, and documents. I
continuously conducted observations throughout the year-long program at each meeting, recorded the words and actions of participants
and facilitators, and conducted informal interviews and open-ended questioning to increase
the quality and depth of the qualitative data
gathered. I also distributed electronic surveys
three times during the course of the year in order to provide essential triangulation of the observed data with anonymous responses from
participants and expand the scope of the data
beyond the team leaders who attended the
monthly meetings in order to get a sense of the
impact of the program on team members at participating schools. Participants also frequently
posted documents to a cloud-based document
library that were accessible to program participants, facilitators, and me. Together, these
four sources provided a deep and multi-faceted data set from which to construct meaningful
interpretations.
In order to focus the inquiry on an investigation of the lived experiences and perceptions
of participant teachers as they worked their way
through the DLC program, I selected a purposeful homogenous sampling method. The criterion for inclusion in the study was participation in the DLC program and all 37 team leaders

Empowering Educators through Teacher Research

were observed, informally interviewed, and/or
electronically surveyed through the course of
the evaluation. I analyzed the impact on members of the school-based teams with the use of
open-ended surveys that I electronically distributed to approximately 200 individual members
of each team at the beginning, middle, and end
of the program. Another source of data regarding the impact of the program on team members
came through the teacher research reports each
team produced and posted to the cloud-based
document library. I analyzed them in order to
evaluate the quality and depth of the research
projects that participants produced through the
course of the program. These reports recorded
the research questions, the methods, and the results of each teams research project and were
summarized and shared in a presentation to the
whole group of team leaders at the final May
meeting.
In addition to transcribing exact-word accounts of what participants said, I observed
each meeting and recorded descriptions of both
the context of these quotations and the accompanying participants actions and behaviors. I
then followed-up with additional open-ended
questions when appropriate, in order to clarify
ideas or to gain insight into the motivations behind participants actions and comments.

Analysis
I analyzed and coded the data according to
themes that I noted as emerging from the data
analysis process itself rather than from any coding process based on preconceived and arbitrary categories that I might have expected to
find before the study began. I identified and
constructed the major themes according to Creswells (2008) qualitative research guidelines
and included the process of coding the data
and generating themes based on perceived patterns that I noted as naturally emerging from
the data. I achieved triangulation by developing themes in the context of all four of my data
sources in order to understand the full depth
and complexity of the observed phenomena.
Once I established these basic themes, I
began coding and organizing quotations containing the actual words of participants according to those themes so that these constructions
could be confirmed or disconfirmed and ultimately illustrated from the participants own

68

unique perspectives. I further interpreted the

data in the context of the relevant literature and
past studies in order to establish where the data
fit into the body of existing knowledge related
to professional development and educational
technology.

Internal Validity
To increase the credibility and accuracy
of the data, I regularly and systematically produced descriptions, records, and reflections
with the intention of recording the participants
experiences and interactions as accurately and
thoroughly as possible. I conducted the data
collection and subsequent analysis according
to Creswells (2008) guidelines for the effective
conduct of qualitative research. I established
internal validity through the triangulation of
both the types of data and the methods of data
collection as Creswell (2008) recommended. To
address the concern that participants might not
be completely open with me during meetings
due to various social or professional concerns,
I collected the electronic survey data without
identifying characteristics attached to participants responses. I then compared the firsthand accounts and personal interviews to the
survey data in order to improve the quality and
accuracy of the data analysis. Next, I compared
this data to the written reports that were produced and posted in the cloud-based document
library, yet another source of corroborating information to the data set. Finally, I confirmed
the presence of the relevant themes through
member checking with school district facilitators of the program and members of the teacher research team. We discussed the emergent
themes I noted as additional evidence of the
findings reliability and credibility.

Results
The results of the study indicate that the
DLC had an impact on the use of educational technology in the classroom among participants in the yearlong teacher research-based
professional development program. I identified
five core themes that help define the most important ways in which the program influenced
participating teachers: Empowerment, teachers as researchers, the use of technology, workload, and engagement. I examine each theme
in turn with direct quotations to illustrate the

69

participants reports of their lived experiences

and perceptions of how the program impacted
them and affected their teaching practice.

Empowerment
Participants used a range of technology
tools and applications, which revealed the efficacy of democratic, participatory, teacher-directed inquiry, as opposed to top-down prescribed programs. Each participant developed
an individual and unique approach to integrating technology in the classroom, and each
teacher selected a research question based on
the specific individual needs he or she identified through the process of developing a personalized research question. This process made
the teacher research project personally relevant
for each individual participant and ensured that
he/she was empowered to focus on questions
relevant to actual teacher practice.
When prompted to discuss the DLC experience compared to previous experiences with
professional development in terms of participant empowerment, Julie (all participants have
been assigned alternative names using a random name generator) became effusive in describing the empowering structure of the teacher research-based professional development
program after all of the final presentations had
been shared:
How much did [the facilitators] talk today? How much did we talk? Were
the teachers here, its our thing. We
chose what we wanted to do and it was
led by us. We didnt just sit and listen
to what they wanted us to learn.
The opportunity to share her research and listen
to other practicing teachers share their research
was a more empowering professional development experience for Julie than sitting and listening to a presenter.
Brian used an interesting metaphor in describing how the program worked to empower participants to find their own path and direct
their own research: Most professional development is like a funnel moving everything in
one direction and focusing down on one little
thing. This program turns the funnel in the other direction, the outcomes are limitless. Rather than sitting and learning specific best practices that may or may not be relevant to each
individual teacher, teacher research empowered

Clarke
Brian to find his own path, discover and study
his own best practices, and relate his professional development to real problems and genuine questions of his own choosing.
Not all teachers liked the open-endedness
of the inquiry process and some participants desired more guidance and sought clear-cut answers. Mary, a kindergarten teacher, expressed
her frustration with the lack of definite answers:
It drove me nuts, the lack of direction. Just being told to explore like that scared me. Not all
teachers felt empowered by the possibilities and
the freedom to explore and find their own solutions; Mary was overwhelmed by the limitless
possibilities and the lack of specific steps to follow. She reported in her findings that she did
not think the use of technology had a noticeable
impact on the quality of her students writing:
Our individual conferencing had more
impact than [the technology] did.
Writers workshop is essential to student learning. Working with the teacher and getting attention from the teacher is the most important thing for kids,
much more than the use of computers.
As she continued her presentation, however, she mentioned improvements she had observed in terms of student engagement and
enthusiasm. When pressed to clarify her findings she continued to insist that the technology
had not provided the benefit, that it was the increased individual attention students received
from her that had made the difference: If anything the research helped me learn more about
my conferencing and how to help kids improve
their writing. It was more beneficial to me as a
teacher than to the students. It improved me.
The process of teacher research did seem to
help Mary improve her teaching practice, even
though she did not think that the use of technology was an important part of that. The DLCs
focus on educational technology is a precondition of the program that somewhat limits participants in demanding research questions that
focus on the use of technology. Marys experience revealed that despite top-down arbitrary
restrictions, teacher research has the potential
to surpass limitations and restrictions and take
directions that cannot be anticipated.
Jesse, one of the district DLC facilitators,
confirmed that the specific use of teacher research to promote educational technology is

Empowering Educators through Teacher Research

potentially limiting: We did kind of just add
the technology thing onto this. Who knows
what would happen if we just opened things up
and let them pursue whatever questions they
want to pursue? It is a bit arbitrary. Because
the Instructional Technology department oversees the DLC, the promotion of technology was
an assumed goal from the inception of the DLC
program.
The specific application of the teacher research program to promote educational technology does appear to have efficacy for other
educators in the DLC program. Joe, for example, expressed his enthusiasm with the program
and the opportunity to explore his own research
question: When people are allowed to choose
they step up to the plate. When you give them
something they care about and are passionate
about they want to do it, and they do. One
qualitative difference between Joe and Mary
was that Joe is a self-described technology enthusiast who loves technology gadgets and enjoys exploring the possibilities of technology
both in the classroom and in his own life. Mary,
on the other hand, described herself as less
comfortable with and knowledgeable about the
use of technology: It was a bit of a disappointment. How can I, after two years of this, still
not know anything about [educational technology]? It may be that the success of teacher research is somewhat dependent on the self-motivation and interests of the teacher researcher,
a question that I address in the future research
section of this article. Considering the need
identified in the literature review to find ways
to encourage reluctant teachers to use educational technology more effectively, this question is an important one and warrants further
examination.

Martha is a good example of a teacher who
initially struggled with the openness and freedom of the teacher research process, but ultimately felt empowered by the ability to explore
her own questions and develop her own study:
At first it was tough. I need linear instructions. I need to know what I am
supposed to do. Its hard for someone
[who is] OCD [Obsessive-Compulsive
Disorder], but looking back on it I was
able to change and grow so much as a
teacher. I learned so much.

70

The experience appears to have empowered

Martha to find her own path even when at first
she thought she needed more direction.

Use of Technology
Two participants reported they did not observe that the program significantly increased
their use of technology in the classroom or their
educational technology skills, but those individuals were the exception to the rule. Overall,
participants agreed that the program considerably increased their use of technology and their
skill in using and applying educational technology tools and applications. Surveying the range
of studies participants in the DLC conducted reveals that they used a broad array of technology, including document cameras, laptops, tablet computers, classroom clickers, podcasting,
video production and editing, cloud-based document sharing, blogging, social networking,
educational games, and web resources. This
breadth indicates that the teacher research program enabled participants to find their own, innovative approaches to incorporating technology and that the DLC program is self-directed,
open-ended and flexible, which is consistent
with the characteristics of effective professional
development identified in the literature.

For example, Noreen experienced a dramatic change in her ability to use technology; she
found herself using a range of technologies and
reported that their use had become ubiquitous
in her classroom: Kids are using the laptop,
document camera and speaker pretty much all
day long sharing their work, presenting, sharing research on the computer through the document camera. The have made movies and slide
shows. The range of technologies employed
and the amount of time spent using technology
shows the profound impact that the program reportedly had on Noreens use of technology in
her classroom.
Max reported a similarly high rate of technology use in his classroom: Amazing! We
use the computer, doc camera, projector and
my own flip camera almost every day. This
was equally true of Kelly who expressed her belief in the importance of integrating technology in todays classrooms: I try to use technology in most all lessons. I really believe that
we need to teach to 21st Century learners and
that as teachers we have to be up to speed with

71

tech. Darryl agreed that technology had become a daily part of his classroom instruction:
Its been huge. I use my technology
daily and students get real-time and real-life exposure to information. I use
it for building background knowledge
with pictures, videos, and music. I
use the microphone and audio for read
alouds or books on tape. I use my document camera to demonstrate writing.
These three examples demonstrate the variety
of solutions all participants discovered and the
enthusiasm and dedication with which they
pursued the integration of technology into their
classrooms.
One of the participants who reported that
his integration of classroom technology had not
increased considerably during the program revealed under further questioning that this outcome was not because he did not use technology in the classroom. Hugh reported that he was
already using an ample amount of technology
before the program began and that he had not
increased it as a result of the DLC: Truthfully,
theres not much difference. It was part of my
practice all along. An audit of the survey responses revealed that participants who reported initially high levels of educational technology skills and use of technology did appear to
report smaller increases as a result of the program, making the relative benefits to teachers
who already use a lot of technology in the classroom unclear. This finding warrants further investigation, and I will address it in the future research section of this article.

Teachers as Researchers
As a requirement for participation in the
DLC program, participants produced a research
report that they presented at the final meeting
and shared with the group on the cloud-based
document library. Taken as a whole, these reports revealed that individual teachers were
able to produce and disseminate valuable qualitative data with other educators who, in turn,
could potentially benefit from the insights and
information generated through the systematic
inquiry of the teacher research process. Initially, some teachers appeared to struggle with the
methodology of qualitative research, however. Many of the participants first draft research
questions revealed the tendency to be locked

Clarke
into notions of authoritative, fact-based science, the ideal of objectivity, the desire to prove
causality, and a preference for quantifiable evidence that Blanchard, Southerland, and Granger (2009) argued can limit teacher inquiry. In
short, many of them appeared to be locked into
a positivist paradigm of research that was incompatible with qualitative methodology. For
example, Roslyn described her concern that
her research would not be legitimate science:
Without a control group or some other way to
show that it works I wont be able to prove anything. This observation demonstrates Roslyns
desire to imitate the process of experimental design, which has important ethical ramifications
for teacher researchers who may not be justified
in withholding interventions or opportunities
from random groups of students for the sake
of scientific experimentation (Maclean & Mohr,
1999). Likewise, Mary articulated her concerns
about the validity of qualitative research on the
first day of the program when the process of
writing a qualitative research question was explained: This is crap! When asked to explain her reaction she responded that it did not
fit her idea of science: Its so watered down.
It doesnt really tell us anything. Marys comments revealed misgivings toward qualitative
methods and showed that not all participants
came into the program with a belief in the value
of qualitative research.
I noted a similar conception during the later stages of the DLC when Jamie expressed
concerns about being able to write-up her findings. She appeared concerned that she had not
produced any reputable data because she had
not produced any quantifiable data: I didnt
use any codes. What my students do cant be
put in numbers; its not about achievement for
them. When pressed for more specifics she
revealed that she worked with students with
cognitive disabilities and that the idea of increased achievement was not meaningful in
her context: If they are paying attention thats
a good thing; most of them cant write or do
math. Written material is over their heads.
However, through exposure to the methodology of qualitative teacher research, Jamie became more comfortable with it and the value of
observation. Her final research report showed
that she was able to produce intriguing qualitative data indicating that her use of technology

Empowering Educators through Teacher Research

did increase student engagement: My students
will never use Google Docs, but they already enjoy the contact they have had with the ActivSlate [A wireless, notebook-sized tablet]. They
are much more involved in their learning when
they have an active part in it. Jamies experience reveals that the development of teacher
researchers and the cultivation of an appreciation of paradigms beyond positivism and methods other than quantitative can help introduce
educators to qualitative methodologies and enable them to see the value of observing, recording, reporting, and analyzing the lived experiences of individuals within specific educational
contexts.
Amy exemplified evidence of thoughtful,
systematic inquiry and concerted efforts to develop more effective teaching practices:
It
is certainly making me more aware of my students engagement and progress with technology. I am thinking differently about how I can use
technology with my students. A similar sentiment from Christian indicates how the teacher
research process made him more aware and encouraged him to continually improve his teaching practice in research-based ways: Through
my research I discovered that kids werent
learning and that my teaching method was not
effective. I will now check their learning very
frequently to make sure I am being effective in
how I teach. This sentiment reveals that the
process of teacher research can be ongoing, and
that these techniques and procedures can inform teacher practice in the future beyond the
scope of the DLC program itself.
At the final meeting of the DLC both Maricella and Joe reported they were already sharing their technology expertise with other teachers. Maricella reported she had become known
in her school as knowledgeable about educational technology issues: Im already sharing my work with computers with other teachers who need to use technology but dont know
where to start. Joe was already starting to
worry about how his growing reputation for
tech-savvy might impact his workload: Sometimes I dont want them to know. Then they
start to come to you for every little thing and it
is like, Hey, I have my own work to do. Comfort and skill with technology was in demand in
Joe and Maricellas school and they both began

72

to spread their knowledge at their home schools

beyond their immediate DLC teams.
Mary, who struggled with the use of technology, found efficacy in the teacher research
process in areas that extend from, but do not
specifically relate to, the use of education technology. In her work using video feedback and
verbal conferencing with her struggling writers
she began to critically think about her writing
rubric and made changes and added nuances
that made it even more effective:
Ive always used the six trait rubric
[A grading rubric that focuses on six
traits of effective writing: Ideas, organization, voice, word choice, fluency,
and conventions], but I found myself
wishing that I had a better one. It just
didnt show the growth that our conversations showed. Im trying to make
it more specific, not just, Does it have
an introduction, but listing the specific qualities of good introductions. Six
traits didnt go in depth enough; it was
too vague.
This reflection is a model of the teacher research practice and it reveals how the teacher research process can help teachers make
thoughtful changes to their practice.

Emilias reflection demonstrates how learning the process of teacher research changed
her mind set and gave her different approaches to developing best practices: I have begun
to look at things differently in my classroom. I
now have the tools to look deeper into things
I notice and do research. From there I can try
to prove or disprove wonderings that I have.
The teacher research process gave her a new
approach and a new set of tools to solve the
problems that she encounters in her classroom
every day.

Teacher Workload
One reality of the teacher research process
is that it requires the investment of time (Maclean & Mohr, 1999) and if the data revealed
any major drawbacks to the DLC program, it
was the amount of time teachers spent and the
difficulty of finding ways to integrate that extra
time into their busy schedules.

Martha explained that she would not undertake the DLC research program again knowing
how much work it entailed: Its the amount of

73

time it takes. Lots of personal time; I wouldnt

agree to do it again knowing how much work
it was. Im glad I did it, I learned a lot, but I
wouldnt do it again. Teachers are very busy
and have little time to spare and for Martha a
research project was a lot to tackle. She did persist through the program, however, and later admitted that she planned to continue using elements of the program in the future, though on a
smaller scale.
At the end of the program, when I asked
participants to remember and describe how
they were doing halfway through the DLC program in five words or less, the aggregated and
anonymous answers of five of the participants
are revealing: Overwhelmed, but invested;
What did I get myself into; [sic] Like it was
too much; In over my head; Misinformed,
disappointed and concerned. These comments give a glimpse into the sense of anxiety
that appears to have taken root among the participants. At the monthly meetings there was a
palpable sense of nervousness and expressions
of concern about the workload and the amount
of time the projects took could be overheard in
the conversation during breaks and transitions.
Among the program facilitators concerns about
the stress participants endured became a frequent topic of conversation.
This sense of anxiety was not universal,
however; a similarly aggregated set of responses to the same question revealed a different
mindset among five other participants who indicated that they were comfortable, competent,
and confident halfway through the program:
Somewhat comfortable; I get parts of it;
Confident in using the tech to further my instruction; That I was a lot more competent
than I gave myself credit for being; I was getting a grasp on Macs. These responses indicate that the sense of anxiety was not universal,
and that for certain participants the experience
was rewarding even at this demanding mid-way
point.
Joe had advice for future DLC teacher researchers to help reduce the anxiety. He suggested that if teacher researchers tackle small
chunks of the process throughout the year rather than waiting until the end to get things done,
their stress levels would be lower: Break everything down into small parts and dont get
overwhelmed by the whole process. Get things

Clarke
done in advance so they wont feel like [it is]
too much toward the end of the school year.
Martha asserted that her lack of understanding
from the outset regarding the workload involved
in teacher research was a factor contributing to
her stress level. She suggested that being mentally prepared for the extra effort might help:
Understand what teacher research is
and the work involved before you start!
I was unaware of the extra work and
was stressed. It all worked out in the
end, but future DLC members should
understand the time and extra load
commitment.
The pervasive sense of anxiety did not last
and eventually most of the participants pulled
through and ended up reporting positive insights about the program. I asked the same five
anonymous participants who expressed anxiety during the mid-way point to describe their
perspective at the end of the program in five
words or less and their responses were much
more positive. They described feelings of relief, pride, and increased confidence: More
practiced but still overwhelmed; It was beneficial; Relieved and proud; Better about
my tech knowledge; Enlightened, grateful to
be finished. Stress and anxiety turned to relief and pride by the end of the program when
participants had the opportunity to share their
findings in the final crucial step in the teacher
research cycle.
Not only did teachers overcome their anxiety about research, but each participant who
responded to the final survey reported that he/
she planned to continue the practices of the
program in the future. Christian confirmed this
sentiment when he reported that he planned
to apply the process to future problems that he
would encounter in the classroom: I am already much more aware of my practices in class
and I will continue to try out any new hypotheses I have in order to see if what I think and
what is are the same thing. The teacher research process can become a habit for educators, which can have a lasting impact on their
approach to teaching.

Engagement
Almost all participants reported increased
student and teacher engagement as a result of
participation in the program. They reported

Empowering Educators through Teacher Research

more engaged and active students, although the
impact of that engagement on student achievement was not immediately clear. Participants
reported that both teachers and students were
energized, as exemplified in an excerpt from a
report by a team of elementary school teachers who describe the positive impact the teacher research project had on both teachers and
students:
We discovered that our students, even
the most reluctant, become excited and
eager to participate in the writing process when these various digital tools
are made assessable. [sic] This paper concludes with the teachers feeling inspired, driven and focused on integrating technology throughout their
teaching.
This school-based team produced data indicating that technology had increased student engagement and affirmed a commitment to the
continued integration of educational technology.

Jeanie reported a similar experience as a result of her DLC experience: My students are
engaged. I am realizing the power of technology used in the right way. For her, the technology by itself was not enough; it was also the
power teacher research gave her to find effective uses for the technology that made the difference. Darrens experience corroborated this
finding and emphasized the importance of organization, planning, and introspection to develop more effective uses for a variety of technology resources:
Students are more actively engaged.
This also makes me more organized
and allows me tools to plan out more
well-thought out lessons. I like being
able to access a variety of resources for
teaching, such as videos and flipcharts
that enrich my lessons.
The teacher research process engages both
teachers and students in the use of technology
in ways that may support critical thinking and
improve education.
Another aspect of educational technology
that cannot be overlooked is its power to decenter the teacher and place students at the center of learning. Just as teacher research-based
professional development places the teacheras-learner at the center of a discovery and exploration process, teachers can use technology

74

to create that same experience for their own

students. Carmella reported that her students
were motivated and engaged when the technology was used to place them at the center of the
classroom as creators and sharers rather than
mere recipients of knowledge: They are motivated to learn with technology. They enjoy presenting and sharing their work. The quality of
their work has improved because they know
they will be sharing. Maricella reported a similar level of engagement: [Students are] so
much more engaged when the technology is being used. We must use technology all the time
to reach this new generation to prepare them
for todays world. Maricellas insight confirms
that teacher research may be an effective way of
meeting the need to update our education practices to meet the needs of twenty-first century
learners.

It is worth noting that 22 of the 24 teachers
who responded to the survey reported that their
students were more engaged as a result of the
DLC program, yet only about half reported that
their students were learning more. This finding shows that there is not necessarily a direct
connection between engagement and learning
in the minds of DLC participants. Joes experience with clickers sheds some light on this phenomenon, as he observed that engagement and
achievement are not inextricably linked: Clickers dramatically increased engagement, but did
not increase scores. Students tended to rush to
be first to answer rather than take time to think
about the right answer. This overzealous engagement illustrates the distinction between
engagement and actual learning; the students
were engaged, but in some ways their over-engagement detracted from their performance on
the assessment. But Joes teacher-research instincts revealed themselves immediately when
he followed this observation up with a newly
emerging research question related to the novelty of the technology and asked what the long
term impact of the technology might be: Maybe its just because the technology is so new to
them. If we kept using the clickers would that
effect wear off over time? Would scores improve
at that point? This insight revealed the development of a new research question about the
extent to which engagement equates with actual learning, which Joe can pursue consistent

75

with the cyclical and ongoing nature of quality

teacher research.

Discussion
This study produced compelling qualitative evidence that the DLC professional development model of team leaders encouraging
teacher research in school-based teams of professionals empowers educators to implement
educational technology practices in thoughtful, systematic, and ultimately effective ways.
The themes revealed that the program empowered participating teachers, and was effective at
turning educators into teacher researchers, increased and improved the quality and quantity
of technology used in classrooms, and that the
largest impact on students appears to have been
increased engagement in classroom activities.
The biggest concern that arose was that teacher
research is time consuming, and participation
in the program required a substantial commitment of time, which added to participant teachers already heavy workload.
The vast majority of participants in the
DLC professional development program reported they experienced an increase in both their
comfort with technology and the frequency of
its use in their classrooms. Therefore, the DLC
program appears to have been an effective response to the call for increased use of technology in the classroom for twenty-first century
learners (Howland, 2009; Goddard, 2002; McKenzie, 2002). Education in the United States
has struggled to adapt to the dramatic societal
shift brought about by the advent of computers and the internet (e.g., Lowther et al., 2008)
and it is imperative that we find effective ways
to promote the use of technology in the classroom. It appears that teachers who participate
in teacher research-based professional development are very likely to be effective at finding
new ways to use technology in the classroom.
Some participants reported that the focus
on educational technology was somewhat limiting compared to a teacher research program
that would have allowed them to focus on anything they chose. There is nothing inherent in
the teacher research program that limits its use
to technology applications, and its use for this
specific purpose is not well documented in the
existing literature. Professional development
that lacked this focus would not, however,
meet the need for the promotion of educational

Clarke
technology in twenty-first century schools.
There is ample evidence, however, that teachers
who learn the teacher research process could
then use that same process for solving other
problems, or answer other questions they identify in their daily classroom practice (MacLean
& Mohr, 2009; White, 2011). Teacher research is
a very flexible program, and although this study
has focused on its use in promoting technology,
an important message for facilitators and participants is that its use for that specific purpose
should not necessarily exclude its use in pursuing other valuable research goals.
Findings in the literature have indicated
that teacher empowerment is an essential element in successful professional development
for educators (Amankwatia, 2008; Bolman &
Deal, 2008; Nuckols, 2008; OHanlon, 2009).
Teachers treated as professionals, given autonomy to find innovative and creative solutions to
their own problems, and who engage in collaborative, democratic, and cooperative professional development opportunities are more likely to
make meaningful and effective changes to their
daily instructional practices. For many educators the opportunity to engage in self-directed
exploration of best practices is empowering and
engaging and promotes genuine and ongoing
improvement, in contrast with prescribed programs in which teachers sit and listen or read
the advice of experts whose tips may or may
not be applicable to their individual classroom.
The range of technology solutions that my participants found, and the range of research questions they addressed, reveals the variety of paths
that teachers can take in effectively integrating
technology. Hall and Elliot (2003) argued that
effective technology implementation is most effective in a flexible environment that encourages individual approaches to technology. An important message for administrators and others
in charge of professional development programming is the power and flexibility of teacher research as opposed to more narrowly focused or
prescribed approaches to promoting technology
usage.
A message in the experiences of my participating teachers is the value of sharing teacher research findings with others. This sharing
of best practices is a crucial part of the teacher research process (Maclean & Mohr, 1999),
meets the need identified in the literature for

Empowering Educators through Teacher Research

a cooperative, participatory, and collaborative
approach to professional development (Hall &
Elliot, 2003; Sherry et al., 2000), and demonstrates that practicing teachers can become effective researchers through the use and application of the teacher research process. Not only
does this benefit participating teachers who are
empowered, and who become part of a democratic community of researchers, it also aids
other educational professionals who can benefit
from the range of valuable findings that emerge
from teacher research projects. The more individuals who participate in scientific inquiry,
the more rapidly and effectively it will move us
forward.
There is a substantial and growing body of
evidence about the effectiveness of teacher research in promoting the data-driven development and sharing of best practices among educators (e.g. White, 2011). Little is known,
however, about the effectiveness of teacher research professional development in promoting
the use of educational technology. The present investigation offers preliminary evidence
that indicates teacher research can be an effective way to increase the use of technology in
schools and teachers technology skills. It is important to note, however, that the participants
in the DLC program were all volunteers, and
were therefore inherently more likely to be selfmotivated and willing to engage in the teacher
research process. Teachers who are required to
engage in such a time-consuming process might
not respond to the program in the same way
that my participants did, and the assumption
that all teachers would benefit from a teacher
research professional development program is
not warranted based on the results of the present study.
Researchers advocating for the value of
qualitative research methods in the constructivist paradigm have had to overcome substantial
resistance from certain quarters of the scientific community that have not been receptive to
constructivism or the use of certain qualitative
methods in the social sciences (Lincoln et al.,
2003). My teacher participants appeared to have
similar concerns about the legitimacy or value
of the qualitative methods that are central to the
teacher research process. Students are not laboratory subjects, and objectivity is not a perspective that teacher researchers are encouraged to

76

adopt. Experimental designs using quantitative methods, including control groups and random sampling, are not the sole goal of all teacher research, but some of my participants did
reveal a tendency to think of scientific inquiry
in positivist, experimental terms only. This tendency not to recognize the value of qualitative
methods among positivist-minded thinkers is at
the root of the paradigm wars of the late twentieth century (Lincoln et al., 2003) and those
same positivist inclinations may persist among
teachers who are not familiar or not comfortable with qualitative methods. Blanchard et al.
(2009) observed that teachers who are primed
with a background in critical theory or postmodern thought are more likely to be receptive
to the ideas of qualitative research and to understand the value of contextual data which, although it cannot be universalized the way that
experimental statistical data sometimes is, can
still provide valuable and transferable information to educators. An important consideration
for program facilitators is to provide a sufficient
background in the strengths and value of qualitative inquiry to social science and not to assume that participating teachers will be familiar
or comfortable with qualitative methods. Participants who appeared to be stuck in a positivist framework, with experimental design as
their model of what research looks like had difficulty understanding the value and importance
of their subjective observations, and the significance of their own lived experiences as valuable
data for analysis.

The most noteworthy impact on students in
participants classrooms was increased engagement. Teachers discovering and exploring new
and innovative ways to incorporate technology during the program found that students generally responded with increased enthusiasm to
these innovations. There is evidence that the
technology itself increased engagement, and
that introducing new teaching and learning
strategies increased student interest. Amankwatia (2008), Foote (2008), Friedman (2007),
and Lowther et al. (2008) all observed that the
goal of technology implementation should be to
remove the teacher from the center of classroom
activity and enable students to become explorers, gatherers, and analyzers of the wealth of information available to them electronically. Students engaged in active learning are more likely

77

to develop skills required to take advantage of

opportunities for learning that technology has
created. An implication that needs further investigation is whether this increased engagement results in increased achievement among
students. The findings of the present study indicated mixed results in this area and were not
conclusive. Students who are not engaged do
not learn, so certainly increased engagement
can be seen as a positive result. Engagement
in and of itself, however, is a necessary, but not
sufficient condition of student achievement.
Not all engaged students are necessarily learning, particularly if they are engaged in non-productive activities or non-educational pursuits.
An important message for educators is to emphasize the educational part of technology and
remember the mere use of technology in and of
itself is not necessarily productive.
A message that emerges from my participants narratives is the need for time in which
to conduct teacher research projects while also
balancing preparation, grading, and teaching
time. Participants reported that the projects required a significant amount of time to complete
and added to their workload. MacLean and
Mohr (1999) argued that education professionals need to proactively assert the need for more
time to conduct teacher research and that providing teachers with the opportunity to participate in teacher research should be a priority for
administrators and school officials. These investments would ultimately pay off in increased
student engagement and more effective teaching
practices, which would ultimately benefit both
teachers and students. Discussion in the literature documents that experiential, long-term
training that provides teachers with opportunities to share, experiment, practice, and gradually develop as education technologists is more
effective than one-shot top-down training programs directly supports this finding (Amankwatia, 2008; Nuckols, 2008; OHanlon, 2009).
Simpler and less time consuming professional
development might seem like an easy answer
for school leaders who are seeking ways to help
teachers improve, but effective professional development requires a long term commitment
and a substantial amount of time and energy
must be devoted to it if it is going to be effective. Given the current climate of budget cuts,
increased workloads, and reduced planning

Clarke
time for educators, however, many school districts may not be ready to invest in a teacher
research-based professional development program. Therefore, it is important to echo MacLean and Mohrs (1999) reminder that we cannot wait for reform before we start using these
practices to improve student learning. Teacher
research can become a part of every educators
teaching practice, and once its basic tenets are
mastered, teaching with thoughtful, systematic,
data-driven reflection can become an instinctual part of everyday teaching practice that is well
worth the time and effort.
In summary, this investigation provided
an indication that teacher research-based professional development can be an effective way
to promote the use of educational technology
in our schools. It empowered teachers to find
innovative ways to incorporate technology in
their classroom, gather and analyze data, and
share best practices with other professionals regarding the most effective technology usages.
It filled an important gap in the literature about
the effectiveness of teacher research as a possible solution to the pressing need to increase the
use of technology in our schools and revealed
that although it is not a simple quick fix or easy
solution, it appears to be an effective one.

Limitations & Future Research

I recognize multiple limitations with the
present study. First, because the participants
in the DLC professional development program
were volunteers, it is impossible to know what
impact, if any, the program would have on other groups of teachers who did not or would not
volunteer for such a program. Furthermore, the
purposeful sampling method of only individuals who participated in the program is nonscientific and therefore, the findings cannot be
generalized. The results of the study should be
considered in context and individual readers
must make judgments regarding the applicability of these findings to other contexts and among
other groups of educators. Future research in
the area of teacher research-based professional development for the promotion of educational technology should explore the impact of selfmotivation and interest among participants in
teacher research-based professional development programs in order to shed more light on
the question of whether a program like this one

Empowering Educators through Teacher Research

could motivate reluctant educators to integrate
educational technology in their teaching.
Another direction for future study would
be to explore the effectiveness of the program
on individuals who already possess high levels
of technology skill. Could those individuals be
motivated to pursue even more exciting and innovative ways to use technology, or does the
principle of diminishing returns minimize the
effectiveness for participants who enter the program with a high level of initial skill with technology? Initial findings from this study indicate
that the program may be more effective at improving the use of technology among those who
began the program using little or no technology in the classroom, but among participants
who were already using a lot of technology it
might not have resulted in improvement. What
requires further study is whether this is an issue that should affect the decisions school leaders and potential participants make regarding
which teachers should participate in this kind
of professional development.
One major consideration that must be acknowledged is the dearth of evidence regarding
the impact of the program on student achievement. There is evidence to support the claim
that the program increased student engagement. Engagement however, is a necessary, but
not sufficient condition for learning and the ultimate impact of the program on student achievement is not immediately clear. Student achievement can be difficult to assess qualitatively, and
this might be a direction for future quantitative
studies that could be designed to measure student achievement in classrooms whose teachers participate in teacher research-based professional development compared to those who do
not participate. It is also important to remember that although achievement is an important
goal, other factors contribute to quality education and education researchers should be careful not to put unwarranted emphasis on standardized test scores as the sole measure of a
programs success or failure.
Finally, I located the present study within
the constructivist paradigm; there may, however, be important contributions to scholarship
that could be made by examining it through an
alternative paradigm lens. Critical theory, in
particular, may prove efficacious in helping to
deconstruct the social constructs which leave

78

educators at the mercy of budget cuts, one-sizefits-all professional development trainings, prescribed curriculums, and short sighted standardized testing goals which leave no room for
teacher research. The finding within the present study that teacher research is empowering
to educators leads logically to the conclusion
that there may be opportunities for scholars
to advocate for the liberation of educators in
the face of social forces that may deny them
the empowerment they could otherwise obtain
through teacher research. Although this construct is outside the scope of the present study,
it is a direction which may prove fruitful in the
future.

References
Amankwatia, T. (2008). Teaching with technology for
21st-century learning: A multiple-case study of a
school districts high school laptop initiative (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
Blanchard, M., Southerland, S., & Granger, E. (2009).
No silver bullet for inquiry: Making sense of
teacher change following an inquiry-based research experience for teachers. Science Education, 93, 322-360.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and
students. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 34, 411-433.
Creswell, J. (2008). Educational research: Planning,
conducting, and evaluating quantitative and
qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, N.J.:
Pearson.
Foote, N. (2008). When laptops come to school: How
do digital immigrant teachers cope (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.
Friedman, T. (2007). The world is flat. New York:
Picador.
Goddard, M. (2002). What so we do with these computers? Reflections on technology in the classroom. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 19-26.
Hall, M., & Elliott, K. (2003). Diffusion of technology into the teaching process: Strategies to encourage faculty members to embrace the laptop
environment. Journal of Education for Business,
78, 301-307.

79

Heydon, R., & Hibbert, K. (2010). Relocating the personal to engender critically reflective practice
in pre-service literacy teachers. Teaching and
Teacher Education: An International Journal of
Research and Studies, 26, 796-804.
Howland, J., & Levin, H. (2009). Here and now in
the school of the future. Independent School, 68,
88-91.
Kuttan, A., & Peters, L. (2003). From digital divide
to digital opportunity. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow
Press.
Lincoln, Y., Lynham, S., & Guba, E. (2003). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In N. Denzin & Y.
Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 97-128). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Lowther, D., Inan, F., Strahl, J., & Ross, S. (2008).
Does technology integration work when key
barriers are removed? Educational Media International, 45, 195-213.
MacLean, M. & Mohr, M. (1999). Teacher-researchers
at work. Berkeley, CA: National Writing Project.
McKenzie, J. (2002). The true cost of ownership.
Multimedia Schools, 9, 24-28.
Nuckols, T. (2008). Issues of technology adoption in
9--12 computer based instruction (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of the Pacific,
California.
OHanlon, C. (2009). Resistance is futile. T.H.E. Journal, 36, 32-36.
Sherry, L., Billig, S., & Tavalin, F. (2000). New insights on technology adoption in schools. T.H.E.
Journal, 27, 42-46.
Thompson, A. (2005). Scientifically based research:
Establishing a research agenda for the technology in teacher education community. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37,
331-337.
White, B. (2011). The vulnerable population of teacher-researchers; or, Why I cant name my coauthors. English Education, 43, 321-340.

Clarke

Copyright of Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research is the property of Journal of Ethnographic &
Qualitative Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.