Running Head: BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

Barriers for K-12 Teachers in Implementing Technology

Anneleise Dickens
Purdue University
EDCI 513
October 8, 2013
Dr. Akesha Horton

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

Abstract
In 2008, The National Education Association (NEA) released a policy brief about technology in
the schools and the challenges of such technology. In it, the NEA outlined a resource to assist
educators integrate technology into schools. Since then it has been found there is still resistance
to implementation. Technology is here to stay; it is everywherebusiness, industry, healthcare.
As observed by the NEA, "Yet, despite the overall progress, many schools are not making full
use of technology as a component of comprehensive school reform." (Technology in Schools:
The Ongoing Challenge of Access, Adequacy and Equity, 2008). Why is there still such
resistance? The purpose of this paper is to identify, through surveys of previous literature,
barriers teachers have in implementing technology in their classrooms; to discover reasons for
the barriers; and to suggest possible ways to remove the barriers.

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

We must bring 21st-century technology into learning in meaningful ways to engage,

motivate, and inspire learners of all ages to achieve, as the U.S. Department of Educations
National Education Technology Plan 2010 (NETP 2010) states. This is a lengthy plan that
outlines revolutionary transformation rather than evolutionary tinkering (Executive Summary,
2010). The NETP offers a model of learning powered by technology in five areas, including
learning, teaching, and infrastructure (Executive Summary, 2010, para. 5). It seems evident just
from the above that technology is in fact now prevalent in K-12 schools in the United States.
However, research has shown there is still resistance to change; specifically, resistance to
implementing technology in the K-12 classroom. Blackwell, Lauricella, Wartella, Robb, and
Schomburg (2013) cite Gray, Thomas and Lewis (2010) and The NEA (2008) in their
introduction:
While computers were once thought of as the silver bullet to education reform,
the technology itself has done little to alter the education landscape or to provide
enhanced outcomes for students. This may be due to the continued under-use of
technology in the classroom across all grade levels (NEA 2008) and the failure to use
technology for instructional purposes. (Gray et al., 2010) (Blackwell et al., 2013, pp. 310311)
What perhaps baffles the mind is why there is still resistance, when technological
advances are being seen in nearly every industry, from healthcare to business, science to
entertainment. And yet, so many lone K-12 classrooms are still mired in the traditional teacherled class. With all these advances, Clarke & Zagarell (2012) maintain that while Teachers bear
the burden of the technological divide that exists in school systemsthe resistance isa

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

response to so many shortcomings with the education systems implementation (p. 137). The
question remains: Why is technology not more prevalent in use in the K-12 classroom?
Barriers to implementing technology
While there are many factors to implementing technology, such as cost/funding,
allocation, location, types of technology), this report will focus on those obstacles which
seemingly impede teachers from implementing technology into the classroom. These barriers
generally fall into three categories, compiled from an empirical study conducted by Balanskat,
Blamire, & Kafal (2007) and cited in Buabeng-Andoh (2012): system-level, school-level, and
teacher-level. See Fig.1 for a description.
Figure 1

System-Level

Restrictive or Rigid:
educational system;
curriculum;
assessment

School-Level
Lack of:
technological
infrastructure; up-todate
hardware/software;
access to technology

Teacher-Level

Lack of:
skills, confidence,
professional
development/training

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

System-level

System level barriers are those generally beyond the control of the teacher. They include
education institutions; systems and districts that rigidly adhere to tradition; teacher-centered
curriculum restricted by standards and policies; and restricted organizational structure
(Buabeng-Andoh, 2012, p.46). The system of education is vastly different from that of business
or healthcare. Demetriadis (2003), as cited in Clarke & Zagarell (2012) proclaims, ICT was
created in the business world and schools do not function in the same manner [for reference,
ICT stands for information and communications technology]. This plays an important part in that
teachers have maintained the primary, teacher-led role, being engaged in rote learning style
teaching, with results in test outcomes considered the primary tool to measure success and test
scores supposedly predict success (p.38).
The Federal Department of Education goes so far, in their NETP 2010, to boldly proclaim
that transforming the education system of the United States is essential. It points out what could
be considered a fundamental flaw in the educational system as compared to business:

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

Improving productivity is a daily focus of most American organizations in all sectors

both for-profit and nonprofit. Education has not however, incorporated many of the
practices other sectors regularly use to improve productivity and manage costs, nor has it
leveraged technology to enable or enhance them..What education can learn from the
experience of business is that we need to make the fundamental structural changes that
technology enables if we are to see dramatic improvements in productivity.we should
recognize that although the fundamental purpose of our public education system is the
same, the roles and processes of schools, educators, and the system itself should change
to reflect the times we live in.(Executive Summary, 2010, paras. 38-39)
School-level

School-level barriers would fall under the responsibility of districts and individual
schools. They include outdated hardware, insufficient equipment, limited technological support
and limited access to the technology (Buabang-Andoh, 2012). Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich,
Sadik, Sendurur E., & Sendurur P. (2012) provide a more positive view of this barrier, perhaps
suggesting that this barrier perhaps is not as prevalent as before, citing an NEA 2008 survey in
which
The majority (74.1%) of the 193 responding educators reported that their access to
computers, the Internet, and instructional software was adequate to do their jobs and
almost all (94.6%) reported having additional access to computers and the Internet at
home. (p. 424)
Teacher-level

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

Finally, there are teacher-level barriers, which seem to be the most important barrier of
all, especially in regards to pedagogical beliefs (Ertmer, 2005). As Rinelli (2013) found through
literature review, these may include but are not limited to the following: lack of experience and
training using technology (hands-on); negative experiences using technology; and low selfconfidence in using and incorporating technology into teaching/lesson.
In the literature reviewed, which included research studies, several overall themes in
regard to the impediments of integrating technology into the K-12 classroom seem to revolve
around three primary obstacles: lack of support in terms of technology and leadership; and lack
of professional development and training, which then tie directly to pedagogical beliefs
(Buabang-Andoh, 2012; Ertmer, 2005; Inan & Lowther, 2010). While the primary obstacles
listed do tie into the categories of system-level, school-level and teacher-level barriers; the
literature appeared to go into more depth on these specific aspects to the categories.
Technology Support
As in most industries, employees need to be able to access equipment that works
correctly and is relatively up to date. Considering that technological advances seem to occur
almost daily, integrating technology into a classroom when it may change the next year, month,
or week, can prove difficult. Holden, Ozok, and Rada (2008) conducted a study of insight into
the interactions between teachers and technology and found that while the relation of
technology and teachers was mostly positive, several of the participants provided reasons such as
computers not readily being available, [and] technology may not always work (pp. 113 &
126). Cost is a factor, as is personnel. Clarke & Zagarell (2012) claim technology support as
probably one of the biggest issues that teachers and schools facewith many schools not

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

employing a full-time or even part-time technical support person, most teachers are fearful that
they will continue to experience problems (p. 38).
The US Department of Education, in its National Education Technology Plan 2010
(NETP) Executive Summary (2010), outlines An essential component of the learning model is a
comprehensive infrastructure for learning.that infrastructure includes people, processes,
learning resources, policies, and sustainable models for continuous improvement in addition to
broadband connectivity, servers, software, management systems, and administration tools.
(para. 30)
Ertmer et al, in their 2012 study, provide data from Gray, Thomas, & Lewis that
substantiates the NETP 2010 outline above: 97% of teachers had access to one or more
computers in the classroom, with approximately half of these teachers (54%) having the option
of bringing in additional computers (e.g., laptops, tablets) (p. 424). Therefore, it seems the
technology support barrier has perhaps been broken down.
Leadership Support
When there is no leader, rarely does work, especially innovative work, get completed,
much less begun. Every school has a leadership structure; Principals are key facilitators in the
effort to infuse technology in schools (Clarke & Zagarell, 2012, p. 37). Studies reviewed show
that sufficient support from leadership is effective in changing the barriers to technology
implementation (Inan & Lowther, 2010; Anderson & Dexter, 2005) and, as Anderson & Dexter
stated, leadership support is a stronger predictor of teachers use of computer technology in
teaching (as cited in Buabeng-Andoh, 2012, p. 144). Clarke & Zagarell (2012) cite a 1997 study
by Merkley, Bozik, and Oakland, who found that leadership promoting change is the missing
factor when it comes to merging technology and instruction (p. 37).

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

Furthermore, Inan & Lowther (2010) cite studies from several others which state support
provided from peers, administration and principals has a positive impact on teachers integration
of technology into the classroom (ODwyer, Russel & Bebel, 2004; Dawson & Rakes, 2003;
Cooley, 2001). More recently, a 2010 Education Week survey reported that 83% of responding
school districts employed a full or part time staff person in an educational technology leadership
role (as cited in Ertmer et al., 2012). They further show that many schools have implemented
technology-planning, professional learning communities, using teacher leaders, and
teachers are turning to social networking sites to interact and learn with and learn from their
peers (Schrum & Levin, 2009; Luehmann & Tinelli, 2008; as cited in Ertmer et al., 2012 p.
425).
Professional Development
A leader willing to provide training and professional development plays an important part
in removing the obstructive barrier of teacher resistance. The majority of the articles reviewed
surmised teacher resistance to technology implementation primarily revolves around a lack of
professional development. Ertmer (2005) wrote about the pedagogical beliefs of teachers and
focused on the fact that there is very little research on the connection between resistance to
implementation and teacher professional development (Ertmer, 2005). In the article the focus is
on how the nature of teacher beliefsare likely to impact teachers classroom practice in
technology (Ertmer, 2005, p. 25). She references Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman & Yoon
(2001) to define these beliefs as:
Second-order changechange that confronts teachers fundamental beliefs and
thus, requires new ways of both seeing and doing thingssecond-order changes
are seen as irreversiblethese types of changes are riskier for teachers, as well as

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

more difficult to achieve. Furthermore, knowing how to facilitate and support

these types of changes is much less familiar to staff developers. (p. 26)

10

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

11

How can those responsible for professional development overcome these beliefs? What
specifically must be changed or influenced in order for teachers to feel sufficiently prepared to
incorporate technology into their curriculum? From Rinellis (2013) research, teachers find it
difficult to evolve from teacher-centered to student-centered learning using new technology
because they lack confidence, they lack practice, and they lack positive experiences with
technology. Due to these factors, many teachers have a poor attitude regarding technological
innovations in education, primarily because, as Balanskat et al (2007) state, they have a fear of
failure and lack of ICT knowledge (as cited by Buabeng-Andoh, 2012, p.140). This fear is a real
one; as stated previously, technology is constantly changing. Further research may be warranted
in order to delve specifically into these fears and whether they are significant barriers to
implementing technology today.
Buabeng-Andoh (2012), Inan & Lowther (2010) and Rinelli (2013) all spend time
examining teachers lack of readiness with technology and conclude that, overall, the reasons
why teachers are not prepared for and/or are afraid of technology are because they have had little
to no opportunity to be trained in pedagogical applications of the technology. Therefore, they are
unable to understand how the technology is relevant to their students (Rinelli, 2013). If educators
cannot comprehend how or why to incorporate technology into a lesson or unit of study, then
they will more than likely resist change (Rinelli, 2013).

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

12

Just as students need to be engaged in order to learn, it follows that teachers need to do
the same. Hands-on practice with technology that is applicable to teachers subject areas or grade
levels can lead to positive experiencesDeveloping pedagogy rather than having educators
trained as if they were instructional technology designers is imperative (Rinelli, 2013, p. 25). In
doing so, teachers are involved in the constructivist theory of learning by doing and can thus
transfer that knowledge to students (Rinelli, 2013, pp. 25 & 60). Holden et al. (2008), when they
asked when they asked high school math and science teachers What can improve the use of
instructional technologies in the classroom received responses such as
consistent and adequate training on how to use technology effectively to support the
instruction, more awareness of what is available, have classroom visits so teachers may
see other teachers using the programs, and time to create lessons or observe them in use
in a real setting. (Holden et al., 2008)
Conclusion
System-level, school-level, and teacher-level barriers can all create serious impediments
to integrating technology into the K-12 classroom. However, as technology evolves and is everchanging, one wonders if these barriers will continue to exist. From the research reviewed here,
it would seem prudent to delve deeper into the pedagogical aspects of technology integration.
Understanding why teachers in all types of schools and all locales of the U.S. have difficulty
with technological integration is more than likely a large undertaking, yet it needs to occur in
order to better understand and aid in greater integration. In order to make the Federal NETP 2010
plan happen in each of its goals, we must better understand so as to remove these barriers.

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

13

References
Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). Factors influencing teachers adoption and integration of
information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature.
International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and
Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 8(1), 136-155. Retrieved from
http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu/viewissue.php?id=31
Blackwell, C. K., Wartella, E., Lauricella, A. R., Robb, M., & Schomburg, R. (2013). Adoption
and use of technology in early education: The interplay of extrinsic barriers and teacher
attitudes. Computers & Education, 69, 310-319. doi:
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.purdue.edu/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.03.031
Clarke, Sr., G., & Zagarell, J. (2012, March-April). Teachers and technology: A technological
divide. Childhood Education, 88(2), 136+. Retrieved from Military and Intelligence
Database Collection.
Cooley, V. E. (2001). Implementing technology using the teachers as trainers staff development
model. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(2), 269284.
Dawson, C., & Rakes, G. C. (2003). The influence of principals technology training on
integration of technology into schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
36(1), 2949.
Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology
integration? Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(4), 25-39. Retrieved
from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30221207

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

14

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher
beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship.Computers &
Education, 59(2), 423-435. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131512000437
Gray, L., Thomas, M., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers use of educational technology in US public
schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics, Institute for Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved
from: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010040.pdf.
Holden, Heather, Ozok, Ant, & Rada, Roy, (2008) "Technology use and acceptance in the
classroom: Results from an exploratory survey study among secondary education
teachers in the USA", Interactive Technology and Smart Education, Vol. 5 Iss: 2, pp.113
134. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17415650810880772
Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010, April 10). ERIC - Laptops in the K-12 Classrooms:
Exploring Factors Impacting Instructional Use, Computers & Education, 2010Nov. ERIC - Laptops in the K-12 Classrooms: Exploring Factors Impacting Instructional
Use, Computers & Education, 2010-Nov. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?
id=EJ892517
Lowther, D. M. (2008). Does technology integration work when key barriers are removed?
Educational Media International, 45(3), 195-213.
ODwyer, L., Russell, M., & Bebel, D. (2004). Elementary teachers use of technology:
Characteristics of teachers, schools, and districts associated with technology use. Boston,
MA: Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative, Boston College.

BARRIERS FOR TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY

15

Rinelli, K., & Adragna, S. (2013). Overcoming K--12 teacher resistance to technology and
learning using M-learning (Master's thesis, Keiser University). ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses, 105. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1352758473?
accountid=13360. (1352758473).
Technology in schools: The ongoing challenge of access, adequacy and equity (Issue brief No.
19). (2008). Retrieved http://www.nea.org/home/36073.htm
United States, U.S. Department of Education, Educational Technology. (2010).Executive
Summary. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010/executive-summary