Secondary students' resistance towards incorporating computer yechnology into mathematics learning

Abstract The concerns of teachers and students in integrating computer technology in the classroom may influence how computer technology is ultimately implemented. There has been substantial research into reasons for teacher resistance towards technology, but not much on students' reasons for resistance. This study examines the concerns of Australian secondary school students incorporating spreadsheets into their mathematics learning. The findings of the study support the position that students' (and teachers') concerns and perceptions of spreadsheets influence the way in which they implement spreadsheet technology into the teaching and learning process. Implications for computer technology education and mathematics learning are also discussed. Introduction This article presents findings from a study that examined voluntary responses from 95 Australian secondary students' performance and perceptions using different teaching styles for the content area of Financial Mathematics in the General Mathematics syllabus (Secondary schooling in Australia is grades 7-12, ages 12-18, and the research for this article was done with grade 11, ages 16-17). We discuss students' perceptions of learning using computer spreadsheets, and their learning preferences. We also present implications for computer technology education and mathematics learning. The common expectation associated with the integration of computer technology into instruction is that it will enhance student learning while significantly reducing instructional costs (Green & Gilbert, 1995). Unfortunately, during the last decade, the rapid use of computer technology in classrooms has created several problems. For instance, in Australia, it was not rare for a school to install computers and educational software and students begin to use computers before anyone questioned the implementation of the technology. The problems associated with the implementation of computer technology were intensified when schools lacked adequate funding to train teachers in the appropriate implementation of this technology. The entire process by which computers and students came together in schools was often "inefficient, poorly planned, and incredibly chaotic" (Maddux et al., 1993, p. 220). Schools rarely have dedicated technical support to ensure that the computers are maintained. Security is also an issue. Almost 8,000 computers valued at approximately $15.8 million have been stolen from NSW (Australian) government schools in the past six years (Sydney Morning Herald, 2002). Implementation in schools is the placement of an innovation in the instructional process and is distinguishable from adoption because many innovations are adopted but never implemented (Bond, 1988). Fullan & Pomfret (1977) described implementation as a "phenomenon in its own right" (p. 336) and suggested implementation studies should measure the correspondence of actual use of an innovation with its intended use. Hord & Ruling-Austin (1986) inform that implementation does not equal delivery of an innovation and that users of an innovation do not necessarily implement an innovation in the way it is intended to be used. Smith & Ragan (1993, p. 416) advise that: In drawing the line of causation from the instruction to the results, it is critical to be able to identify the degree to which the description of the program represents what actually occurred during instruction with the new program. Implementation is often difficult and complex due to the variety of curricular programs, computer platforms, and educational populations served by various courseware products. Consequently, schools cannot expect to experience gains in student achievement as well as motivation from computer technology adoption if it is not properly implemented. Several researchers have suggested that the way in which users of an innovation perceived the innovation was fundamental to their level of use of the innovation (Fullan & Pomfret, 1977; Hughes & Keith, 1980; Kimpston, 1985). …