Citation
The Use of Technology in the Art Classroom to Engage 21st Century Students

Material Information

Title:
The Use of Technology in the Art Classroom to Engage 21st Century Students
Creator:
Wicklund, Natalie
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, FL
Publisher:
College of Fine Arts; University of Florida
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
Project in lieu of thesis

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Committee Chair:
Roland, Craig
Committee Co-Chair:
Tillander, Michelle

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Art education ( jstor )
Art teachers ( jstor )
Arts ( jstor )
Classrooms ( jstor )
Computer technology ( jstor )
High school students ( jstor )
Learner engagement ( jstor )
Learning ( jstor )
Schools ( jstor )
Students ( jstor )

Notes

Abstract:
This capstone project examines how K-12 art teachers are currently using technology as a tool to engage their students and foster a learning environment that connects student interests with contemporary art themes and curriculum. For my research I reviewed the current body of scholarly literature (2004-2014) pertaining to the subjects of student engagement, student-centered learning, and engagement through technology. Additionally, I interviewed eight art educators on their personal curriculum practices and how they use technology in their classrooms as a tool for student engagement. Through my research I found that the literature praises art educators for being one step ahead of other educators in terms of tackling how to teach 21st century students. The art educators I interviewed were motivated by technology even when faced with limited resources in their schools. All eight participants used technology as a means to engage their students in whatever manner they could and many of them were beginning to practice student-centered classrooms. From these interviews I have made an ISSU publication detailing each educator’s pedagogy and technological practices (http://tinyurl.com/NWISSUU). My capstone paper describes my research process and findings. First, I discuss why there is a need for change in teaching practices to facilitate better learning for today’s students. I then describe how current art educators are using technology in their classrooms to engage their students. Lastly, I conclude this capstone paper with final insights on the future direction of technology in the art classroom.
General Note:
Art Education terminal project

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida Institutional Repository
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Natalie WIcklund. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 1 THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM TO ENGAGE 21 ST CENTURY STUDENTS By NATALIE WICKLUND A CAPSTONE PROJECT PRESENTED TO THE COLLEGE OF THE ARTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA November 2014

PAGE 2

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 2 ©2014 Natalie Wicklund

PAGE 3

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 3 Acknowledgements First, I would like to thank my parents for instilling in me the importance of education and a desire for learning. I cannot give enough praise to Florida Vocational Rehabilitation for giving me this opportunity I would have otherwise not been able to reach. To my cheering section, Kate Pancarician and Heidi Wicklund, for helping me through deadlines, final projects, and making sure I saw the light at the end of the tunnel. I might not have found my calling as an educator had it not been for my professors Janis Brothers, Pamela Theis, and Holly Hanessian who saw something in me and he lped me realize that art education was where I wanted, and needed, to go in life. Lastly I would like to give a heartfelt thank you to Craig Roland, Michelle Tillander , and Elizabeth Delacruz . Throughout my two years in the Online Art Education ogram they have always guided me in the right direction, sometimes with a kind and well needed nudge, and have helped shape me as both an educator and a researcher.

PAGE 4

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 4 ABSTRACT OF CAPSTONE PROJECT PRESENTED TO THE COLLEGE OF THE ARTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF F LORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM TO ENGAGE 21 ST CENTURY STUDENTS By Natalie Wicklund November 2014 Chair: Craig Roland Committee Member: Michelle Tillander Major: Art Education Abstract This capstone project examines how K 12 art teachers are currently using technology as a tool to engage their students and foster a learning environment that connects student interests with contemporary art themes and curricu lum. For my research I reviewed the current body of scholarly literature (2004 2014) pertaining to the subjects of student engagement, student centered learning, and engagement through technology. Additionally, I interviewed eight art educators on their pe rsonal curriculum practices and how they use technology in their classrooms as a tool for student engagement. Through my research I found that the literature praises art educators for being one step ahead of other educators in terms of tackling how to teac h 21st century students. The art educators I interviewed were motivated by technology even when faced with limited resources in their schools. All eight participants used technology as a means to engage their students in whatever manner they could and many of them were beginning to

PAGE 5

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 5 practice student centered classrooms. From these interviews I have made an ISSU publication ( http://tinyurl.com/NWISSUU ). My capstone paper describes my research process and findings. First, I discuss why there is a describe how current art educators are using technology in their classrooms to engage their students. Lastly, I conclude this c apstone paper with final insights on the future direction of technology in the art classroom.

PAGE 6

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 6 Table of Contents Title Page Title Page ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 1 UF Copyright page ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 2 Acknowledgements ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 3 UF Formatted Abstract ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 4 Table of Contents ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 6 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 8 Statement of the Problem ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 8 Purpose or Goals of the Study ................................ ................................ ............................ 8 Research Questions ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 9 Rationale and Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ........... 10 Assumptions ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 10 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 10 Definition of Terms ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 11 Literature Review ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 12 Why Curriculums Need to Change ................................ ................................ ................... 13 Engaged Students ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 14 Technology as a Tool ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 15 Steps to Success ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 16 Methodology ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 18 Subjects ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 19 Research Site ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 19

PAGE 7

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 7 Data Collection Procedures and Instrumentation ................................ ............................. 19 Data Analysis Procedures ................................ ................................ ................................ . 21 Findings ................................ ................................ ......................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Alesha Belinstine ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 23 Amber Lemser ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 25 Candice Blount ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 28 Grace Ho ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 30 Hilary McLean ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 32 Madeleine Pinaire ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 34 Sara Gurney ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 36 Tammy Hoppe ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 38 Summary of Findi ngs ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 39 Discussion and Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 40 Discussion and Interpretation of Findings ................................ ................................ ........ 41 Significance, Implications, and Recommendations ................................ .......................... 42 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 42 References ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 43 Appendix A ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 46 Appendix B ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 48 List of Figures and Captions ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 49 Author Biography ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 50

PAGE 8

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 8 Introduction As a digital n ative (Prensky , 2001), someone who has grown up always connected and within reach of a digital device since I was five, I feel like I still have something in common with 21 st century learners. Growing up I struggled in classes to keep up with the lectures and rigorous memorization expected of me. During my high school years and even some of my undergraduate career it felt like I was simply going through the motions of work and not actually learning or creating anything. According to Ito, Horst, Bittanti, Boyd, Herr Stephenson, Lange, & Robinson, (2008), Shernoff (2013), and Yazzie Mintz & McCormick (2012) my experiences are not much Since birth, students today have been surrounded by advancing technology and methods to best fit with how students are learning with technology. Statement of the Problem With a shift in the learning styles of 21 st century students (Keengwe & Georgina, 2013; Roehl, Reddy & Shannon, 2013) , art educators are beginning to change their teaching methods to As an a spiring art teacher I want a better understanding of what practicing art educators are doing to facilitate these new learners . Purpose or Goals of the Study The purpose of this study is to obtain some insight into how art educators today use technology in their classroom s and their teaching practices. To achieve this understanding I reviewed education literature and interviewed eight art educators on their practices and have published these interviews in a narrat ive format in an ISSUU document (Figure 1) to share with other aspiring art teachers.

PAGE 9

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 9 Figure 1 . Screenshot of ISSUU document. Research Questions My capstone project focuses on three main questions regarding student learning and W hat are the teaching styles used students? With students wanting to always be connected, their need for instant random information access, and ability to multi task I wanted to have a better understand ing how art educators are changing their pedagogies , if indeed they are, to facilitate these new learners. W logy practices in the classroom? With limited knowledge of how art teacher use of technology I wanted to better understand exactly how teachers are using technology in their classrooms. Are they using technology in new ways or are they u sing it to do old things with new tool s (Prensky, 2005)?

PAGE 10

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 10 H ow do art educators use technology to engage students? Since technology is important know how te achers were connecting the two, if indeed they are. Rationale and Significance of the Study I believe this study is im portant for my personal growth and pedagogy, as a way to view art practices outside my own small community. While I knew technology was commonplace in classrooms prior to this project, considere d normal technology use in art classrooms and how were art teachers making use of it . As an aspiring art teacher and someone who regularly uses technology I wanted to become more informed and hope that other future art teachers will feel the same way and find this research useful. Assumptions I expected a high level of technology use among the art educators whom I interviewed, both in the classroom and in their personal life, because they were motivated to use technology in t heir personal life by getting an Online Limitations Participants for my interviews came from a narrow pool of subjects , a closed Facebook Program . Gaining par ticipants through the Facebook m essaging system was difficult due to the ability for Facebook members to turn off notifications of messages from people they are not connected with. The time limit of interviews was two weeks, one of which fell on the last week of classes for some of the participants which resulted in minor scheduling issues . As I have never worked as an art educator I cannot give my personal opin ion on this subject. I also

PAGE 11

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 11 assumed that potential participants may doubt my ability to perform this study due to my inexperience. Definition of Terms Digital native s . Mark Prensky (2001) originated the term to describe the generation of digital music players, video games, cell phones, and all the other toys and tools of the digital age (p. 1). Scholars may also refer to these types of people as Millennials , the Net Generation , and the Google Generation . Digital immigrant s. People who were born before digital media and devices became mainstream, every day items (Prensky, 2001 ). Millennial. A similar term to Digital Native used to describe young people whose lives learn in collaborative learnin g environment and exhibit a preference for teamwork incorporating cooperative learning and constructivist principles (Keengwe & Georgina, 2013, p. 52). Flipped c lassroom. Lecture or instructional content is assigned out of class as homework or in 45). Student centered learning . Also known as a learner centered classroom centered approach is based on the understanding that students learn more when they take responsibility for their own learning. Further, the instructor assumes a new role of guiding, mediation, modeling, and coaching active learners ( Keengwe & Georgina, 2013, p. , 201 3 , p. 52)

PAGE 12

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 12 Student e ngagement. This phrase is commonly used to describe a student who is actively participating and retaining informatio n . A behavioral component associated with positive behavior, effort, and participation and emotional/affective component that includes interest, identification with school, a sense of mintz & McCormick, 2012, p. 747). Literature Review Wit h the rise of digital technology, students are now learning differently than they have in previous generations and it is causing a problem for both teachers and students (Prensky, 2001). As teachers continue to use old curriculum that focuses on memorizati on and lecture, the students who are now used to multi tasking and instant access grow bored and weary. In the past decade progress in changing teaching methods and curriculum but it is still not enough. Simply being connected to a computer in a classroom or having students point and click through online educational programs are not enough to engage them and to have them think critically about what they are learning. There are many ways to connect with students through technology and at different levels of For my literature review I examined publications from 2004 2014, focusing on keywords such as art education, technology, student centered learning, student engagement, and digital natives and branching out into similar keywords from there. First I looked into how 21 st century students are different learners than previous generations and how teache rs are changing their curriculums to reflect this. I then began looking in to student engagement: what it is and how scholars suggest achieving it. Next I discuss what scholars think of how teachers are implementing techn ology into classrooms. Lastly, I searched how scholars suggest promoting technology in the classroom for successful student engagement.

PAGE 13

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 13 Why Curriculums Need to Change Inter net, to a computer, and to each other, all within one device. Unlike previous generations, they have grown up in a world where people are plugged in and wired to each other and the world. By growing up with this overload of technology, millennial students or digital natives have a different way of learning and working. Students today are used to social connectivity and collaboration, instant access to information, and multitaski ng (Prensky, 2001; Roehl, Reddy & Shannon, 2013). With the change in learning st yles of the student s the teaching and learning activities in the classroom need to change with them. Gregory (2009) reminds us that education is about centered approaches that use the power of new learning technologies that focus on collaborative learning, (p. 47). Roehl, Reddy,& Shannon (2013) also suggest shifting from the dictating lectures centered a round the educator to a curriculum based around the students and their needs. To facilitate student learning , educators and scholars are bot h beginning to emphasize student centered learning strategies. This shifts the importan ce from the project or lectur e to the student and the ir personal learning centered classes, the students and their ideas are the focus of study. The class begins with them and their artistic pursuits. Students choose a medium that will best express their artistic goals an students leading the inquiry, teachers become guides and facilitators rather than instructors. The student centered learning approach includes such t echnique s substituting active learning experiences for lectures, assigning open ended problems and problems requiring

PAGE 14

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 14 critical or creative thinking that cannot be solved by following text examples, involving students in simulations and role plays, and using self paced and cooperative learning. (Seng, 2014, p. 143) Anoth er form of student based learning is the flipped classroom where student inquiry is reserved for class time and viewing lectures or preparation work for the next class is assigned as homework. In order for students to take learning into their own hands in the classroom they must Properly implemented student based learning can lead to increased motivation to learn, greater retention of knowledge, deeper understanding, and more positive attitudes t owards the centered learning gives 21 st ce ntury students the lead role of investigator s when learning is placed directly in their hands. By keeping with th e education of generations past, educators today risk causing strife between themselves and their students who grow unintereste d the longer the lectures go on (Shernoff, 2013; Yazzie Mintz & McCormick, 2012) . Directly relating to the art classroom, gies can also create schisms those in the visual arts, to i ntegrate technology into their classrooms as they are the gateway in Engaged Students Student based learning is a means of engaging students, but how does one know w hen a student is engaged? Student engagement is a complex term that every scholar and teacher has their own definition for. Is it actively participating in the classroom? Retaining information?

PAGE 15

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 15 Enjoying learning? O r a combination of those and more? Yazzie mintz & McCormick (2012) discuss the factors that go into student engagement and in their article on the subject they say positive behavior, effort, and participati on and emotional/affective component that includes ( p. 747). Shernoff (2013) continues this by discussing the many ways how to measure the different types of engagement , what can promote or discourage engagement, as well as determine s terest, Along with the methods previously mentioned there are many way s to engage students . In Yazzie Survey of Student Engagment (HSSSE) they found that 60% of students group projects while in contrast 42% of students mintz & McCormick, 2012, p. 753). One of the biggest points they make is for teache rs to simply ask their students what engages them as a starting point for student engagement and classroom learning . Technology as a Tool There are misconceptions that by simply using technology in the classroom, either through computer access to the Inte rnet or having students use digital programs they are receiving a quality lear ning experience (Dempsey, Hofer & Harris, 2013 ). While technology can be a creative medium for studen ts to use, simply to use it should not be the main outcome of a lesson . Wilks, Cutcher, & Wilks (2012) say that educators need to continue creating curriculum that breaks the mold and keeps students thinking and questioning while using technology to assist their inquiry process t are meaningful,

PAGE 16

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 16 Educators who simply strive for the use of technology without a thought as to how students interact with it in relation to the visual arts are not fulfilling creative pedagogy enabling the concepts of teaching and learning to drive the art education nology should not be the center focus of a curriculum but instead that art making should continue to remain the primary objective: When students learn to express themselves creatively, they create art rather than just completing an exercise for the assignment. The technological basics can be taught alongside with the artistic theories and principles; when working together, they provide the student with what they need to engage their creativity. (Black & Browning, 2011, p. 22) Bla ck & Browning conduct ed a three year study program for art educators to create lessons thrived when they focused on creative art ideas and not technology driving the curricula, but they 2011, p. 24). By designing a lesson and picking the digital medium or tools best suited for the task, teachers have a higher success in engaging their stude nts in study. Steps to Success As previously mentioned, scholars believe that art educators should be at the head of developing creative and innovative curriculum with technology inclusion and there is a plethora of articles to back this up. Numerous s cho larly articles plan out step by step how art teachers can begin to incorporate technology into their classrooms in order to create better learning

PAGE 17

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 17 environments for students (Black & Browning,2011; Gregory, 2009; Huffman, 2013; Roehl, Reddy, & Shannon, 2013 ; and Wilks, Cutcher, & Wilks,2012). Some art educators take this a step further by creating blogs and curating bookmarking sites to discuss and share their new teaching methods. Black & Browning (2011), Gregory (2009), and Wilks, Cutcher, & Wilks (2012) all give good descriptions on setting up a classroom for engaged student learning alongside technology. Gregory (2009) describes a structured and well thought out plan to begin for implementing technology in the classroom. First, she suggests if an art edu cator is not familiar with technology he or she should seek out a mentor in a college within the school who is willing to help answer questions. Secondly, the classrooms should be set up for student centered learning. This method of teaching gives students a role in the learning process and can be tested out through project based learning, problem solving, interdisciplinary learning, and cooperative learning. Next, Gregory encourages art teachers to understand the limits and uses for the technology at their disposal and learn to use the tools immediately available and any other relevant technologies that y our students may be using. She recommends that once you have set up a plan and have begun to interact with the technology you wish to use on a regular basi s, begin integrating the technology into your art classroom in stages. Lastly, Gregory encourages teachers to do not stop once they collaborating with others using dista nt and learning technologies to create a social learning All the work and planning and learning for a teacher can be a lot. By working alongside other art educators and spreading the load across a group or by modifying a lesson plan provided by another art educator online, art educators can make a daunting task a reality. Both Black &

PAGE 18

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 18 Brown ing (2011) and Lin (2011) remind educators that technology does not have to be mastered erything about the software; they need only to be Brown ing , 2011, p. 21). By mastering only the basic elements of a program teachers can learn along with their students as they work. Not only does this relieve stress from the teacher but it also creates a cooperative learning enviro nment for the students and gives them creditability for learning. While the groundwork is beginning to be set in order to use technology in a learner centered classroom there is still much for art educators to do. By continuing my research through interviewing art educators on their own practices and building my own base of educational resources , as both a digital native and an aspiring art educator , I hope to add a unique perspective to the literature currently available. Methodology My capstone project focus es in two areas: a review of scholarly literature from 2004 to 2014 on technology use in art classrooms and interviews of technol ogy using art educators. My literature review covers the past decade on how art teaching practices are changing, how art educators are implementing technology in their classroom s in order to engage their students, what challenges art teachers are facing wi th bringing technology into the classroom, and how teachers are engaging their students. For the interview portion of my research I questioned eight art educators over Skype, a video conferencing progr am, on their technology practices in the classroom and how they use technology to engage their students.

PAGE 19

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 19 Subjects Eight art educators participated in my study. Dispersed across the United States, the educators varied in both age and years of teaching. I use d the Facebook group for the Univers ity rogram, a closed group only for students and alumni of the prog ram, to find interviewees. This was a purposeful sampling of teachers who use technology beyond digital media or generalized use. A purposeful sampling is a sampling of people specifically selected to represent expert knowledge of the population ( Battaglia , 2008). In compliance with University of Florida Institutional Research Board (IRB) rules, I asked for the e their responses in my study. Research Site Since the participants in the interviews are spread out across the United States I conducted the interviews over a video conferencing program, specifically Skype ® , and recorded the conversations with screen capture software , specifically Screencast O Matic ® . Data Collection Procedures and Instrumentation This project is classified as quantitative research through a purposeful sampling interview. I collect ed data through semi structured interviews with art educators as a means to gain insight into their technological practices. I follow ed the steps for creating interview questions and conducting interviews as outlined by Dilley (2000), Jacob & Furgerson (2012 ), and Rowley (2012). I interview ed eight art educators with nine open ended questions ( Appendix B ) and the interviews lasted from fifteen minutes to thirty five minutes . In creating my questions I followed Ro wley (2012) suggestion be checked to ensure that they: (1) are not leading or have implicit assumptions; (2) do not include two questions in one; (3) do not (4) are not too vague or general; and (5)

PAGE 20

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 20 (p. 265). I also creat e d an intervie w protocol for myself that listed the questions I intended ask ing along with a script of what to say before and after the interview, a reminder to collect informed consent forms , and to ask for any other information either party might need after the fact. In compliance with University of Florida Institutional Research Board rules, I ask ed for the written consent to use their responses in my study. Along with starting the interview with the basics in terms of getting to know eac h other and beginning with simple questions, They al so advise to create large, open ended questions that you would have never thought to ask and often those things become one of the most , prompts were added i n order to help remind me as the interv iewer to keep on track and to help explore different avenues of questioning. With my questions determined, I practiced the interview in a pilot test with my sister who is in her fourth year of teaching high school studio art. I chose my sister for the pilo t test for two reasons, the first of which was that interviewing her would be less stressful since we know each other and this would help me become use to asking the questions. The second was that her pedagogy is sim ilar to the aim of my study and , as a ma researcher, she could give me assistance with creating prompts for each question. The questions were arranged for optimum flow of thought and after her interview it was decided that the questions themselves brough t forth the needed information and only a few required prompts to delve deeper.

PAGE 21

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 21 Once I had my first interviews scheduled I began searching for a screen recording device to use. I had previously used Screencast O Matic ® but it would only record up to fifteen minutes of video without a paid subscription. I instead used a free client software called S Recorder ® which had a similar layout: A boundary screen to show where the program was recording, buttons for stopping and st arting recording, a save button, and a button for exporting the file to a different file format. I tested the program out by recording a Youtube ® video and going through different websites. I exported this data and opened it in a media player to test that it worked correctly. The first two interviews were less than a day apar t so I decided to wait on transcribing the first interview until after the second interview. While exporting the two interview files th e program crashed and all data on the program beca me corrupted. After searching online for a way to salvage my files and finding no alternatives I instead took this as a loss. I purchased a subscription to Screencast O Matic ® and attempted to reschedule repeat interviews with the two participants but was unable to due to scheduling conflicts. With a new screen recording program and eight scheduled participants I began exporting the videos once an interview was finished and transcribing it immediately afterwards. Data Analysis Procedures Besides collecting data for research purposes , I also record ed and analyze d information regarding the potential respondents in regards to their participation. Seventeen members of the UF Art Education Facebook group were initially contacted to ask for participation in the study. Two did not reply , five were either not working or were working in areas that were not applicable to my study. To analyze the data gathered from both the literature review and the interview s I used a framework based on procedures common to qualitative analysis. Dierckx de

PAGE 22

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 22 Casterlé, Gastmans, Bryon, & Denier (2012) and Smith & Firth (2011) both describe useful step by step processes for developing and coding qualitative data. The first step in the p rocess in data management is to become familiar with the data itself. After each interview I immediately transcribed the audio and once all interviews were completed I replayed the audio to double check my transcriptions. I then printed out and read throu gh each interview transcription multiple times to become bette r aquatinted with the material . Dierckx de Casterlé, Gastmans, Bryon, & Denier (2012) warned that researchers do not take enough time to properly review and re review the data given, even at the later stages of analysis to make sure all conclusions have accurately described the initial data. I read through the hard copies twice, color coding phrases that connected to each of my three questions. Blue was used for conversation related to learning s black represented where the art educator spoke about how they engage students with technology. In the margins I categorized what each code section related to, generalizing them int o terms such centered learning This was helpful as I began writing my vignettes, which was also another way to familiarize myself with the gathered data. Lastly, I took all of my codes and categories and listed th em together by their color grouping to sort through and look for common themes. Findings In order to best organize and present the information from the interviews I wrote them in pedagogy, technica l practices, and how they foster student engagement through technology. I was surprised to find that three of my participants had limited technology available to use in their classrooms, usually a single computer and projector. Still, all but two of the participants s tated that they wanted to use more technology and would use

PAGE 23

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 23 what they had available to its full extent. No matter their technology standing, all participants commented on their schools having some form of computer lab that were unavailable to them due to b eing reserved for testing. When explaining how they use technology in their classrooms as forms of student engagement, all participants were using technology in ways that supported old techniques. For instance, instead of using a slide projector teache rs used a digital projector connected to a laptop to show reproductions. However, most also used technology as a way to enhance student learning. By having access to search engines students could find the answers to their questions immediately and begin th eir o wn inquiries . Some students also found greater value in their art work after submitting them to online galleries. None of the participants said they were doing completely new, transformative things with their technology. Alesha Belinstine Alesha and I met at the last intensive Summer Studio class held in Gainesville, FL. I decided to ask her to participate when I remembered hearing her talk extensively about her students during our class together at UF. Our meeting was on a Monday at 4pm Central Time and we spent the first few minutes of our Skype session catching up and talking about the graduate program. Her camera is at a low angle, pointing up at her. The room she is in is painted a medium blue and I can see part of an ink drawing hanging on the wa ll behind her. Alesha Belinstine lives in Michigan and has been teaching kindergarten through fifth grade art for five years. She teaches at two schools and has roughly 800 students. Focusing more on critical thinking and creativity than technical skills, she prefers to have a student centered classroom where they have control of the learning process.

PAGE 24

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 24 Alesha has a high proficiency with technology and admits that her iPhone is essential to her since she does everything on it. Along with her personal laptop she uses an iPad provided to her by her schools to do daily tasks, both personal and professional. Students at one of her two schools are very active with technology and are constantly relaying information about the lesson that they have researched at ho me to her during class time. Although the other school is in the same district, the use of technology outside the classroom by her students is drastically lower. In her classrooms Alesha has access to an iPad, an Apple TV, and a projector. While the comput er lab is already reserved, there is an iPad cart for her to check out as well as a new Chrome book cart she has yet to use in her classroom, but is excited to implement. Alesha sees technology in the classroom as unavoidable in this day and age and think s of it as an important and useful tool. But even with the attraction of technology, Alesha has a hard time using it in her classroom. Unless she checks out the iPad cart she and her students have access to only one iPad in her classroom. She says that ca n be hard and wishes she could put technology in the hands of her students more often. Along with the problem of accessibility she always need to be upgraded. To engage her students, Alesha primarily shows her students resources from the Internet, such as contemporary or historical reproductions and videos. She has them take responsibility of their work by having the third, fourth, and fifth graders create and maintain their own artwork galleries on Artsonia (http://www.artsonia.com/), an online museum for student artwork. Alesha says her students enjoy taking pictures of

PAGE 25

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 25 about th interacting and attempting to solve the idea. Alesha believes that in the future student exposure to technologies in school will be greater as schools continue to bring in new technologies and hopes that there will be one device engaged. will ever take the place of traditional tools and mediums in the art classr Amber Lemser Amber and I met over the summer when we were in the same clas ses during the two week long intensive studio sessions at the University of Florida. While I had not known much about her technology use I did know from speaking with her then that she cared greatly about 8 pm in Florida when we started the Skype session. She was sitting in a cream colored room on her brown couch with her laptop. At the edge of her video screen I could see the white furry outline of her cat sitting on top of the couch back. Amber Lemser is art educator in Arkansas who has been teaching for six years and currently teaches grades pre kindergarten through fifth. Her teaching style focuses on student -

PAGE 26

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 2 6 centered inquiry and students are given access to whatever technology or medium they feel would a student feels he or she needs, Amber will try to acquire it if the school has it, such as checking out the iPad cart. Amber admits to not interacting with techno logy much in her personal life. While at school she is continuously on the computer for correspondence , in adapting to new digital tools. Other than using a social media account to stay in touch with family and friends and working in the Online Masters of Art Education Program through the University of Florida, Amber says she has just the bare minimum of new technology to get by. Although she personally may go without technology, she is intimately acquainted with many of he high. Have you ever heard of Minecraft when, while using technology in a lesson such as an animated flipbook, her students g et excited because they have already done something similar in their own exploration of technology. She believes her students are highly engaged with their own sources of technology and that the more technology is pulled into the classroom the better prepa red they will be for the real world situations they will encounter in life. Amber considers her school digitally proficient when it comes to technology. Each classroom has a projector, an interactive whiteboard a document camera, and a few student computer s in most of the individual classrooms. Along with three computer labs on campus that teachers are encouraged to take advantage of , there is an iPad cart and a laptop cart that can be checked out for classroom use. Amber is very decisive on her view of tec hnology in the art classroom, believing that it can be both beneficial and cumbersome depending on the case. As an

PAGE 27

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 27 art educator who focuses mainly on hands on building and hand eye coordination, she only lightly incorporates hands on use of technology in h er classes to start getting her students familiar with technology for later on in their educational career. Much of her technology use is of a supporting role for the lesson. When using technology in her classroom Amber first considers her students and th eir needs. In her student centered classroom she is careful not to push technology on students who dislike using it. Otherwise, students only have to ask to use a piece of technology hardware. Besides using technology hands on when needed, Amber uses it to enhance lessons with videos, PowerPoint presentations, and picture taking. Students use computers to write along with the art they are making or to select images to use in a newly taught technique of transferring ink jet printed images on transparency she ets to other mediums. Students also get to connect and chat with artists and authors outside their community through Skype video conferences. on in the classroom, whet her it be a discussion with other students or with the teacher one on way to build a rapport with students and, through that connection, she can facilitate learning. Despite having plenty of technology to use, there are still downfalls Amber has to face. Internet connections can be slow when too many students are online. S he also mentions that getting technology fixed can be troublesome as the technology specialists only visit her building once a week. But even with these minor setbacks Amber sees technology as a high contributor to YouTube ® videos on how to do something or a step by step process. I think technology is

PAGE 28

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 28 enhancing student learning in so many different ways and are engaging students in a way that believe that it will ever replace the hands on approach to studio art. She believes that being able to touch and feel the process of making art is a part of the learning experience. I t is important for for learning but she believes there will always be the need for students to do the hands on art making themselves. With students already being overloaded with technology in their daily life, sometimes the simplest route is the best. Candice Blount Candice and I started our Skype ® session by reconnec ting and sharing our recent accomplishments. She has recently moved to a new home and a new school and I have just been Candice is seated in the corner of a tan colo red room with two windows streaming in light beside and behind her. I am seated at my desk, my camera pointing down from atop of my monitor to view my blue room and green carpet. Our conversation derails as she notices a black blur across my carpet and I i ntroduce her to my dachshund. With the silliness over we begin to discuss my interview. Candice Blount lives in Texas and teaches pre kindergarten through fifth grade, with roughly 700 students in her school. She has been shifting her teaching style after being in the by step lessons that all result in the same artwork to being more of a facilitator for learning, giving her students more of guidelines and assisting them as they move through the process. Sh

PAGE 29

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 29 the basics, so they can move forward technically but I want them to discover their voices in art, her students are just as tentative about their new freedom over creativity and mediums, but enjoying it nonetheless. Referring to her laptop as her best friend during the interview, Candice uses technology t is at the opposite end of the spectrum. With the use of only a laptop and a digital projector at her command, Candice says she is already missing her former classroom and its single iPad. Without even the ability for her students to take and upload their own artworks with accompanying artist statements to an online Candice was happy to share that she had heard her school was getting a Computer on Wheels to check out the COW System for her students at length. Candice admits that simply using the laptop and projector in her classroom keeps the students engaged and attentive. In her previous classroom the addition of an iPad made a large difference in how she taught. Candice used art applications such as photo editing or movie making software on the iPad to teach her student new mediums and keep them engaged. Now with only the use of a laptop available to her, Candice makes the most of it by having students research questions regarding the topics and lesson the y are working on or look up an artist. Engagement is important to all teachers and Candice believes it is a mixture of excitement, interest, and curiosity. She says the worst thing that can happen is a student who looks bored,

PAGE 30

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 30 questions or are excited to share something she feels like they are making progress and are engaged. Candice looks towards technology as a way to keep students engaged. She believes that I think a new and novel thing. For teacher. Either way, Candice believes using technology in the art classroom is always beneficial to her and her students. Grace Ho Grace and I meet on Skype on a Wednesday morning at 10 am (Figure 1). Her camera is at a low vantage point where she sits, angled up to view the high vaulted white ceiling of the 13 Summer Studio printmaking class. We spent the first few minutes reflecting on our individual Capstone projects for the program and on our mutual excitement on graduating soon. Figure 2 . Screenshot of Grace Ho and Natalie Wicklund on a video call usin g Skype ® .

PAGE 31

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 31 Grace Ho is a community based art educator who lives in North Carolina. She teaches five separate afterschool semi private art lessons to students ranging from kindergarten to 12 th grade. With a background in art history, Grace has never used a fully structured lesson plan but rather has, as she calls them, lesson ideas. Her students supply the overarching theme, or big idea, of the lesson and she adds in the technical skills she wa nts them to learn. With the control more predominant in the second half of the school year when it is up to the students to come up with a project and implemen t it with two of the materials and skills they have previously learned. Grace is adamant to admit that she is not the most skilled with technology and like her students she uses it primarily for connecting with others via social media and research. Her u se of technology stems from self motivation to learn and the feeling of needing to keep up with her down and have a conversation with somebody. But because of whe re I live and the remote Because her students have limited technology use at their school, Grace says she knew when she started teaching that she wanted them to have it availab le to use in the studio. She makes sure to have her laptop and iPad available for her students to look up questions and tells wants her students to be able to cre ate their own inquiry process as well. Even if she knows the answer she lets the students look it up themselves and once they find an answer she has a short ha uses technology primarily as a tool for student inquiry and research. Through it may seem

PAGE 32

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 32 minimal, for her classroom she judges this form of technology engagement as one of the best art educators can offer students. Along with researching she says she measures student engagement about their progress and not be overwhel med. Along with research, Grace uses online references to engage her students. As an art history major she tries to combine not only historical and contemporary works but artwork from children across the country and outside of the classroom for her studen ts. She believes this gives them the ability to look beyond their regular classrooms and make broader connections. someone who is not always a fan of technology, she still strives to expand and improve her understanding of it and its numerous uses. She does not incorporate it into the art making process, but rather into the intellectual exploration that naturally takes place in the classroom. Grace is a classicist when it comes to use of physical media to create art, but she sees the necessity of incorporating technology into her classroom. Hilary McLean Hilary and I planned to meet on Skype on a Thursday night, 10 pm Florida time and 7pm in California. She is highl y active online as an art educator and researcher and was one of the first people I contacted for these interviews. We had to push back the meeting time by an hour due to technical difficulties and eventually ended up with video on both sides but only audi o coming from her. Neither of us miss the irony of this and laugh off the problems as I resign to type my questions into the message box. Hilary McLean lives in California and has recently changed positions from teaching middle school studio art to high school drawing. Being in a new classroom Hilary decided it was

PAGE 33

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 33 time to change her teaching methods. She has begun to use choice based teachi ng in her classroom and uses the Spiral Workshop online lesson plans and the art educational scholar Olivia Gude as guides. With her giving up some control of the classroom to allow for more student freedom, Hilary now tries to focus more on teaching probl em solving, risk taking, and experimentation in the studio. seem to get he r students to use their technology for research. She assigned them a simple homework task of finding and printing out artwork images they liked. The students did not turn it have the available technology at home. Hilary has just as much trouble being able to do simple online tasks in class. In her classroom she has an eight year old laptop, document camera, and projector. As of our interview she had been waiting for two months for a cord to connect her laptop to the projector. To make due she points the document camera at the laptop screen, and while it gives off some One for getting her hands messy, Hilary still says that if she had access to more t echnology she would use it since it makes the creation and documentation processes quicker. Currently she takes her students to the library to access the student computers there to do research. When asked what she would do if she had the available techno logy she said she would like to have her kids experiment with different forms of digital mediums. Previously she had her middle school students do photo manipulation and saw success in many of her students. She says and read what other art educators are doing with their

PAGE 34

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 34 technology. She says even a single iPad would make a world of difference in the classroom. At the moment she is trying to figure out how to do stop motion animation with a single document camera. What She says it takes a trust between the students and the teacher to cre ate that kind of engagement. If she had the availability of technology one way she would like to work with that kind of engagement would be to have her students create mini documentaries for art history. The Art 21 videos are popular with art educators but only focus on contemporary artists. Hilary complains that a lot of art history videos are out dated and not that appealing to students. But having students create their own short video segments on researched subjects from art history might be a fun way to Madeleine Pinaire It was a great surprise to me when I found out that there was another student in the sized town. That surprise dou bled when I realized she was the new art teacher at the elementary school that I had attended. I only had to drive a few miles apartment and we sat in her cozy living room late one Sunday morning, discussing the graduate program and attending to her two friendly cats before getting to the interview so we could then go out to eat. Madeleine Pinaire has been teaching in Florida for four years and current teaches kindergarten through fifth grade. What has affected her teaching style the most is her students. now tries to give them open ended projects to explore and more opportunities to be creative. To

PAGE 35

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 35 have her students actively coming up wi th their own questions and solutions to problems is what Madeleine views as student engagement. Only using technology outside the classroom for social media sites, Madeleine is not a big user. Her students on the other hand are constantly on their cellpho nes and she has been told by even her younger elementary students she needs to join sites like Instagram. Her use of technology in her professional life mirrors her personal life. She would rather have her students get messy instead. In her classroom are a laptop, a projector, and a document camera that she uses to show videos of art processes or personally demonstrates projects for them to watch on the overhead projector. She says that use of technology makes her job easier, as walking around the classroo m showing thirty them a close up and continuous view as the document camera does. The main problem Madeleine faces with technology is that she is just not used to it. She thinks there could be more teacher trai ning and professional development on the subject. But that may only be useful if she had access to technology. While there is a computer lab and a newly purchased Chrome book cart it is almost impossible to book an entire week for a grade level as both tec hnology sources are usually booked for testing. When asked what she would do if she did have any technology available to her she said would rather focus on that.

PAGE 36

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 36 Sara Gurney Sara was one of the first people I asked to interview whe n I decided to inquire on technology practices in the classroom. We spent two weeks rooming together over the summer at the intensive summer studio classes in Gainesville. During that time she had discussed with myself and our two other roommates about how she received an iPad cart for ten weeks and how she used them with her students. Our Skype session started at 4pm on a Monday not long after she had gotten home from work and we jumped right into the interview. Sara Gurney has been teaching in Florida for five years and has just changed elementary schools in her county. She believes that every child can be successful in art, plus that anyone can create and use various forms of media to do so. She has recently beg un adding more student Instead, she is presenting an issue for the students to think about and solve in their own way. and teaching practice. At home she says both her and her husband are constantly on their iPads or Macs. At school she tries to incorporate students also use te chnology frequently and talk about downloading apps or programs they have used in the classroom on their personal tablets. At her previous school it was the opposite case, technology and each class needed a day of basic training on how to use the iPads. Sara believes schools should students for the world they will be going into and t echnology in the real world is only going to increase. Sara believes that not to teach students with technology would only hinder them.

PAGE 37

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 37 In her classroom Sara uses technology to engage her students by simply using it day to process, what she defines as engagement. This is the first year her school will be gettin g an iPad cart and the students are enthusiastically waiting for their turn. The lessons she uses during the ten weeks while she has the iPad cart build on techniques the students already have used in traditional mediums and allows them to explore the digi tal mediums (Figure 3) . For her older students they take pictures of their previous works and use the iPads to manipulate the images. Figure 3. Image of Sara Gurney and student. Even with her ten weeks of technology use in her classroom, Sara still thinks it is important to have a balance between digital and traditional mediums. She says that a talented art educator will know that you have to ha ve both, that there is a happy medium in all forms of

PAGE 38

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 38 teaching. Overall Sara believes the best thing educators can do for their students is to find a form of engagement and help them discover their own method of inquiry so they can take learning into their own hands. Tammy Hoppe While looking for participants for the interview I noticed the frequency that Tammy interview on a Monday evening when Tammy would be av ailable during conferences in her classroom. Her video showed a corner of her room where her desk was with a whiteboard and a large blue flag in the background. We spent the first few minutes of the interview talking about how odd it was that we had both a ttended two weeks of summer studio classes in Gainesville but never met. Tammy Hoppe lives in South Dakota and teaches high school art. In her classroom she prefers her students to lead and she acts as their guide while focuses their learning on big ideas and themes. Her classroom is one of collaboration and community. She believes that when students are sharing with one another their ideas and the products of their artwork they are fully engaged in the learning process. She is an advocate for technology an d uses as much as possible in her classroom. All of her lessons, worksheets, and other documents she uploads to online servers for quick access anywhere. Tammy happily boasts that her school is open to student and teacher use of technology and that there technology. In her classroom she has an interactive whiteboard and laptop computers. Her classroom is not equipped with a document camera so on her own time she makes videos of demon strations and uploads them to YouTube to show to her class at a later date.

PAGE 39

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 39 To understand how much her students know about technology, Tammy surveys them at the start of a lesson on what they know about a particular device or program that they will use. technology at hand and need a review or if they have already used it before and want to learn something different. It makes it easier for her when everyone is at th e same level and are building on previous skills. For example, when her students already know how to use the audio recording ability in PowerPoint Tammy shifted the lesson to include making podcasts instead, something most of them had never done. Now her s tudents can make self assessment responses through the podcast recordings. Tammy is glad to see the rise of new technology in the classroom. Instead of teaching them step by step she feels like teachers now can let students have the ability to learn on t heir own, give feedback on what they know and what they can produce with the new knowledge given to them. To keep her students engaged she uses technology as a teaching tool and as a medium for technology to be useful she still thinks it should not be forgotten that technology is a tool in the itself. With the wide scope of available technology today, Tammy also hopes that schools might begin producing tips of the month to highlight resources teachers might not know they have or know how to use. Summary of F indings A ll the art educators I interviewed used technology as a mean s to promote student learning. They all focus on or were beginning to implement student based learning in their

PAGE 40

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 40 classrooms. Only one out of the eight art educators commented on not wanting to implement technology in her fi nd it appealing for her student s use. Besides this one educator all other participants wanted to bring more technology into the art classroom and used wh at they had to the fu ll extent. In addition to using technology as a replacement for an old teaching or learning method, some art educators were using technology as a means to enhance student learning in ways previously unavailable such as connecting with other art classrooms in real time across the United States . The majority of educators I interviewed stated that their students were easy to engage with the assistance of technology. Lastly, although they use technology and stress the benefits from it the majority of the educat ors interviewed thought that technology was a tool to be used to facilitate learning and art making and should not be the sole focus of their instruction . Discussion and Conclusion The goals of my research were to better understand what current art educ pedagogies are, how they are using technology in their classrooms, and how they are using technology to foster student engagement. With technolog y being one of the main topics of discussion in schools today scholars remind us that technology should be used as a tool for learning and the use of it shoul d not be the end product (Black & Browning, 2011; Dempsey, Hofer, & Harris, 2013; Wilks, Cutcher, & Wilks, 2012) . Additionally , s cholars state that educators mu st stay on par with technological practices and list many ways for teachers to begin to familiarize themselves with technology and its many uses in the classroom (Black & Browning, 2011; Gregory, 2009; Huffman, 2013; Prensky, 2005) . While the art educators i nterviewed are not doing anything completely innovative and new they are still using technology in way s that their students will benefit from, even when faced

PAGE 41

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 41 with limited technology. Prinsk step proce ss: (1) dabbling, (2) doing old things in old ways, (3) doing old things in new ways, (4) things in old ways, such as using a digital projector to show reproduction s, but some were also (Prensky, 2005). What Prinskey determines to be the next step in technology integration is not just renovating and adapting current ideas to new technology but starting over again with new ideas, new teaching methods, and new forms for every aspect of the classroom new t hings in new ways. Discussion and Interpretation of Findings As an aspiring art educator, what I have found through these interviews has been completely enlightening. Though my research pool was small it was still greatly different than my own community and gave me a new insight to teaching art. As a digital native who sat through long lectures in school I am pleased to find that art educators are beginning to find ways to assist 21 st century learners and that there are multiple ways to do so. Likewise, while technology can be used as a tool to create art, there are just as many ways, if not more, to use technology to engage students, to get them thinking and connecting with the world outside the classroom. While the addition of technology in the art classroom is a great help to education as a whole it must be remembered that it is the quality of teaching that students are receiving is what matters the most. In the end, technology can only be used as well as an educator can teach, no computer can substitute for an educator who places the value of student learning over all else.

PAGE 42

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 42 Significance, Implications, and Recommendations The underlinin g significance of my research is that art education is going in a steady, rising path . It is important that art educators classrooms to enhance learning and begin to use technology to transform student learning into something new and different. A spiring a rt educators like myself will hopefully find this research project as enl ightening as it has been for me. If possible one day I would like to expand this research to a wider scope of art educators to include those who have one to one technolog y systems for their classrooms. I would also like to interview art educators who are taking technology use in the classroom a step above the rest by creating ne w technology out of old technology parts and art educators who use low tech s olutions for high tech problems . Perhaps there is a different way of looking at teaching, technology, and student engagement that they are seeing or a different way of instruction they are doing that lea ds them down a different path a path that transforms art education into something new. Conclusion While there is still much for me to learn as an aspiring art educator I believe that art education and art educators are working hard to keep the needs of 21 st century student at the forefront. What I have learned throughout this c apstone project will be the foundation of my pedagogy and I hope to join other art educators in continuing to shape the future of art education.

PAGE 43

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 43 References Andrews, B. H. (2010). St udent Ownership: Learning in a student centered art r oom. Art Education, 63( 4 ), 40 47. Battaglia, M. (2008). Purposive sample. In P. Lavrakas (Ed.), Encyclopedia of survey research methods. (p. 646). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Black, J. & Browning, K. (20 11). Creativity in digital art education teaching practices. Art Education , 64(5), 19 34. Dempsey, J., Hofer, M., & Harris, J. (2013). Grounded technology integration: Visual arts. Learning & Leading with Technology , 40 (5), 36 38. Dierckx de Casterlé, B., Gastmans, C., Bryon, E., & Denier, Y. (2012). Quagol: A guide for qualitative data analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies , 49 (3), 360 371. . Theory into Practice , 39 (3), 131 137. Gregory, D. (2009). Boxes with fires: Wisely integrating learning technologies into the art classroom. Art Education , 62 (3), 47 55. Huffman, S. (2013). Benefits and pitfalls: Simple guidelines for the use of social n etworking. Education , 134 (2), 154 160. Ito, M., Horst, H. A., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Herr (2008). Living and learning with new media: Summary of findings from the digital youth project. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning , (November). Jacob, S., & Furgerson, S. (2012). Writing interview protocols and conducting interviews: Tips for students new to the field of qualitative research. Qualitative Report , 1 7 (6), 1 10.

PAGE 44

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 44 Keengwe, J., & Georgina, D. (2013). Supporting digital natives to learn effectively with technology tools. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education , 9 (1), 51 59. Lin, C. (2011). A learning ecology perspective: School systems sustaining art teaching with technology. Art Education , 64 (4), 12 18. Pri nsky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon , 9 (5), 1 6. Pr i nsky, M. (2005). Shaping Tech for the Classroom: 21st century schools need 21st century technology. Retrieved November 23, 2014, from http://www.edutopia.org/adopt and adapt shaping tech for classroom Roehl, A., Reddy, S., & Shannon, G. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active lea rning strategies. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences , 105 (2), 44 49. Rowley, J. (2012). Conducting research interviews. Management Research Review , 35 (3/4), 260 271. centered learning appr oach. International Education Studies , 7 (7), 143 148. Shernoff, D. J. (2013). Measuring student engagement in high school classrooms and what we have learned. In Optimal Learning Environments to Promote Student Engagement (77 96). New York: Springer. Smit h, J., & Firth, J. (2011). Qualitative data analysis: the framework approach . Nurse Researcher , 18 (2), 52 62. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning. (2008). Living and learning with new media: Summary of findings from the digital youth

PAGE 45

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 45 project. Cambridge: Ito, M., Horst, H. A., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Herr Stephenson, B., Lange, P. G., & Robinson, L. Wilks, J., Cutcher, A., & Wilks, S. (2012). Digital technology in the visual arts classroom: an easy partn ership. Studies in Art Education , 54 (1), 54 65. Yazzie mintz, E., & Mccormick, K. (2012). Finding the Humanity in the Data: Understanding, Measuring, and Strengthening Student Engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (1st Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (743 761). New York: Springer.

PAGE 46

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 46 Appendix A Natalie Wicklund 120 SE Mojave Way Lake City, FL 32025 Nlw09c@ufl.edu Informed Consent Notice Dear Art Educator: I am a graduate student at the University of Florida. As part of my capstone project I am conducting interviews of art educators for the purpose of learning how they are using technology in their classroom to engage students. The results of this study will help my study gain insight into how and in what ways, as a collective, art educators are and are not making progress with student engagement with regards to technology. I am asking you to participate in this survey because you have been identified as a mo tivated and technically proficient educator. Participants will be asked to meet at a scheduled time online over a video messaging service such as Skype or Google+ for an hour and be asked ten to fifteen open ended questions on your educational practices a s well as a possible follow up interview for no longer than thirty minutes. Participants will be video recorded, which to be transcribed immediately after the interview. You will not have to answer any question you do not wish to answer and may quit the in terview at any time. Only I and the University of Florida will have access to the recorded video for verification purposes, which will be deleted at the end of the study. I will only publish your name upon your consent. Otherwise I will remove any identifi ers so your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. There are no known risks or immediate benefits to the participants. No compensation is offered for participation. You are free to withdraw your consent to participate and may dis continue your participation in the interview at any time without consequence. If you have any questions about this research protocol, please contact me at (386) 697 9248. Questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant rights may be direc ted to the IRB02 office, University of Florida, Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611; (352) 392 0433. By signing the following form and returning it via printing, scanning, and emailing, you are giving me permission to report your responses, either anonymou sly or identified, in the final manuscript to be submitted to my faculty supervisor as part of my course work. Thank you, Natalie Wicklund

PAGE 47

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 47 Informed Consent Notice I, ____________________________________, have read the procedure described above. I volunta in the art classroom to engage 21st century students. I have received a copy of the research description. Please mark one: ______ I consent to the use of my name in this study. ______ I DO NOT consent to the use of my name in this study and wish to be anonymously identified. ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Signature Date

PAGE 48

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 48 Appendix B Interview Questions 1. Tell me about yourself and your teaching pedagogy. a. What is your opinion of technology in the classroom? 2. How do you personally define student engagement? 3. How do you assess student engagement? 4. e the classroom? a. What kind of technology do you interact with outside the classroom? 5. What kind of technology do you have access to at your school and in your classroom? a. What challenges do you face with your technology? 6. In what ways do you use technologies to engage your students? 7. How do you incorporate technology into a new lesson? 8. How do you see new technologies contributing to classroom learning? 9. Is there anything else you would like to add or comment on with regards to engaging students with technology?

PAGE 49

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 49 List of Figures and Captions Figure 1. Screenshot of ISSUU document. Figure 2. Screenshot of Grace Ho and Natalie Wicklund on a video call using Skype ® . Figure 3.

PAGE 50

ENGAGING TECHNOLOGY IN THE ART CLASSROOM 50 Author Biography Natalie Wicklund was born in Lake City, FL. She can trace her family line of educators to her great grandmother down to her mother, her sister, aunt, and elder cousin who currently work for the public education system. After an accident left her partially disabled in 2000 she spent her middle school years homebound and in front of a computer making friends across the 2011 where she realized her love for teaching art rather than making it. While unable to work and waiting on a hip replacement, Natalie began pursuing a 2014 2 015 Adult Volunteer of the Year at Westside Elementary School and is now looking forward to accomplishing her dream of becoming an art teacher in 2015.