Volume 8 Issue 4 (2019)

Supporting Science Teachers’ Learner-Centered Technology Integration through Situated Mentoring

pp. 248-263  |  Published Online: December 2019  |  DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2019.84.4

Marian G. Rosenberg and Yunjo An


Learner-centered technology integration is a challenging task for many teachers. In an attempt to support science teachers’ learner-centered technology integration efforts, this study developed a situated mentoring program and examined its impact on teachers’ attitudes, technology integration practices, and perceived barriers. Further, the study explored ways to improve the situated mentoring program. Qualitative data were collected from pre-mentoring interviews, observations, and post-mentoring interviews. The results revealed that most participants were teacher-centered and somewhat skeptical about the value of technology for learning prior to the mentoring program. The situated mentoring program had a positive effect on the participants’ attitudes toward learner-centered technology integration. However, in terms of changes in technology integration practices, the results were mixed and varied from teacher to teacher. The personalized professional development and support appeared to be one of the major strengths of the situated mentoring program. Findings from the participants’ program evaluation data provide useful insights into professional development for learner-centered technology integration.

Keywords: Learner-centered instruction, student-centered learning, technology integration, learner-centered technology integration, situated learning, situated professional development, science teachers, mentoring.


Abdi, A. (2014). The effect of inquiry-based learning method on students’ academic achievement in science course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 37-41.

An, Y. (2012). Learner-centered technology integration. In V. C. X. Wang (Ed.), Encyclopedia of E-Leadership, Counseling and Training. Hersey, PA: IGI Global.

An, Y., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2011). Creating technology-enhanced, learner-centered classrooms:  K-12 teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, barriers, and support needs. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(2), 54-62.

Anderson, S. E., Groulx, J. G., & Maninger, R. M. (2011). Relationships among preservice teachers’ technology-related abilities, beliefs, and intentions to use technology in their future classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing Research45(3), 321-338.

Bell, R. L., Maeng, J. L., & Binns, I. C. (2013). Learning in context: Technology integration in a teacher preparation program informed by situated learning theory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 348-379.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

Brush, T., & Saye, J. W. (2009). Strategies for preparing preservice social studies teachers to Integrate technology effectively: Models and practices. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 46-59.

Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13-20.

Cresswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dani, D. E., & Koenig, K. M. (2008). Technology and reform-based science education. Theory into Practice47(3), 204-211.

Ehman, L., Bonk, C. J., & Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2005). A model of teacher professional development to support technology integration. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) Journal, 13(3), 251-270. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/j/AACEJ

Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development53(4), 25-40.

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education42(3), 255-284.

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.

Fallik, O., Eylon, B.-S., & Rosenfeld, S. (2008). Motivating teachers to enact free-choice project-based learning in science and technology (PBLSAT): Effects of a professional development model. Journal of Science Teacher Education19(6), 565-591.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Francom, G. M. (2016). Barriers to technology use in large and small school districts. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 577-591.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., & Desimone, L. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal38(4), 915-945.

Glazer, E., & Hannafin, M. (2008). Factors that influence mentor and teacher interactions during technology integration collaborative apprenticeships. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education16(1), 35-61.

Glazer, E., Hannifin, M. J., & Song, L. (2005). Promoting technology integration through collaborative apprenticeship. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(4), 57-67.

Grove, K., Strudler, N., & Odell, S. (2004). Mentoring toward technology use: Cooperating teacher practice in supporting student teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education37(1), 85-109.

Guzey, S., & Roehrig, G. H. (2009). Teaching science with technology: Case studies of science teachers’ development of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 25-45.

Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science25, 167-202.

Hanover Research. (2014, July 2). Professional development for technology integration. Retrieved from https://www.hanoverresearch.com/insights-blog/professional-development-for-technology-integration/

Holmes, A., Polhemus, L., & Jennings, S. (2005). CATIE: A blended approach to situated professional development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(4), 381-394.

Hughes, J. E., Kerr, S. P., & Ooms, A. (2005). Content-focused technology inquiry groups: Cases of teacher learning and technology integration. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(4), 367-379.

Kopcha, T. J. (2010). A systems-based approach to technology integration using mentoring and communities of practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 175-190.

Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1109-1121.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Matzen, N. J., & Edmunds, J. A. (2007). Technology as a catalyst for change: The role of professional development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education39(4), 417-430.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Mouza, C. (2006). Linking professional development to teacher learning and practice: A multi-case study analysis of urban teachers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(4), 405-440.

National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Retrieved From http://epsc.wustl.edu/seismology/book/presentations/2014_Promotion/NGSS_2013.pdf

Odom, A. L., Marszalek, J. M., Stoddard, E. R., & Wrobel, J. M. (2011). Computers and traditional teaching practices: Factors influencing middle level students’ science achievement and attitudes about science. International Journal of Science Education33(17), 2351-2374.

O’Dwyer, L. M., Russell, M., & Bebell, D. (2005). Identifying teacher, school, and district characteristics associated with middle and high school teachers’ use of technology: A multilevel perspective. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(4), 369-393.

Orrill, C. (2001). Building technology-based, learner-centered classrooms: the evolution of a professional development framework. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(1), 15-34.

Palak, D., & Walls, R. T. (2009). Teachers’ beliefs and technology practices: A mixed-methods approach. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 417-441.

Patton, K., & Parker, M. (2017). Teacher education communities of practice: More than a culture of collaboration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 351-360.

Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research & Development51, 57-76.

Plair, S. (2008). Revamping professional development for technology integration and fluency. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(2), 70-74.

Polly, D., & Hannafin, M. J. (2010). Reexamining technology’s role in learner-centered professional development. Educational Technology Research & Development58(5), 557-571.

Pritchett, C. G., Pritchett, C. C., & Wohleb, E. C. (2013). Usage, barriers, and training of Web 2.0 technology applications. SRATE Journal, 22(2), 29-38.

Russell, M., Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L., & O’Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 297-310.

Russell, M., O’Dwyer, L. M., Bebell, D., & Tao, W. (2007). How teachers’ uses of technology vary by tenure and longevity. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(4), 393-417.

Sugar, W. (2005). Instructional technologist as a coach: Impact of a situated professional development program on teachers’ technology use. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 547-571.

Ward, J. R., West, L. S., & Isaak, T. J. (2002). Mentoring: A strategy for change in teacher technology education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education10(4), 553-569.

Yilmaz, K. (2008). Social studies teachers’ views of learner-centered instruction. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(1), 35-53.

Zucker, A. A., Tinker, R., Staudt, C., Mansfield, A., & Metcalf, S. (2008). Learning science in grades 3-8 using probeware and computers: Findings from the TEEMSS II project. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(1), 42-48.



► Journal Metrics

  • 8% acceptance rate
  • 3.4 (2023) CiteScore (Scopus)
  • Q2 (2023) CiteScore Best Quartile
  • 0.42 (2023) Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

EDUPIJ Statistics from Scopus

CiteScore: 3.4, view Scopus page

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

► Educational Process: International Journal is member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 

► New issue coming soon! (Volume 13 Issue 3, 2024)