National Social Science Association

National Social Science Association Home
NSSA History
Membership Form
Conferences and Seminars
Officers and Board Members
New Announcements
Contact NSSA

Integrating Technology into the College Classroom:
Current Practices and Future Opportunities

Robin Lindbeck
Innovative Performance Improvement, Inc.

Brian Fodrey
University of North Carolina


     Faculty are integrating technology into the college classroom. But what are they doing?  What’s working?  And how can we bring these ideas into other classrooms?  As a result of questions like these the gap that currently exists between technology and effective teaching and learning strategies continues to widen (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007). The integration of technology and proven pedagogy often suffers at the expense of each other. Yet, many studies conclude that faculty members continue to find ways to use technology that benefit both their fields of study and improving student learning. Recent ideas such as Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK), which adds “Technology” as a third form of knowledge to Shulman’s “Pedagogical Content Knowledge” framework urges educators to no longer focus on each area of emphasis independently, but instead where all three intersect or overlap (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). This shift demonstrates a new way of thinking in how we associate technology for the sake of teaching and its role in learning.

     As newer technologies become increasingly more popular, a desire to incorporate them as learning tools will begin to mount in the name of good “instructional technology” practices. As a result, the selection and integration of these technologies into the college classroom can take many forms and directly impact the effectiveness of student instruction. Also, like most other aspects of education, technology is susceptible to a variety of complementary factors that influence its level of success such as adult learning principles, curricular limitations, pedagogical strategies, as well as personal, institutional and societal barriers. Identifying how faculty members are using technology in the classroom may prove to be invaluable in developing a catalog of current practices and new opportunities for integration that can span fields of study, as well as enhance new ways of learning.

Literature Review

Adult Learning
     As a college faculty member, applying andragogical (also known as adult learning theory) principles can be critical in effectiveness as an educator of adults. Adult learners have unique instructional needs to be met, expectations to fulfill, and barriers to overcome and therefore this requires a different pedagogical approach then does teaching younger children (Knowles, 1980). The following is a summary of the six factors described by Knowles (1980) as the key characteristics of how adults learn.

  1. Adults have a multitude of life experience and knowledge that can contribute to and assist in their learning.
  2. Adults are often self-directed and autonomous in their pursuit of education; however appreciate learning from and collaborating with others.
  3. Adults are results-oriented and often seek for reasons related to why they are learning something.
  4. Adults are goal-oriented and often already have expectations that need to be met throughout a learning intervention.
  5. Adults expect the respect of their instructors and peers, as well as appreciate when their knowledge or experience can be used in the classroom.
  6. Adults are pragmatic about how and what they learn, as well as how quickly it can be applied in their lives.  

Addressing these characteristics of adult learners into the design of the class enables the faculty member to minimize some of the barriers to learning and more deeply engage the student in the learning.

Millennial Generation
     In addition to focusing instruction around the principles of adult learning theory, understanding the learner from a generational or societal perspective can also be useful in creating an engaging classroom experience. Today’s college student, otherwise known as a millennial, is comprised of a series of characteristics that are the result of the times they grew up, and the experiences they have had (Strauss & Howe, 2007). Recognizing how the traits of a millennial generation-adult learner can impact the classroom may open the door to a modern-era classroom that we have still yet to see. These traits take form in a variety of perspectives, life-style choices, and expectations of higher education (Strauss & Howe, 2007). Millennials expect the world to be re-writable, and dynamic in not only how they access information…but also how they create it!  They are collaborative, team-oriented, and have highly structured personalities that coincide with the characteristics described in adult learning theory (Knowles, 1980).

     As learners, millennials are generally good students and apt to expecting success from hard work (Strauss & Howe, 2007). Their professional and social networks are constantly connected, and believe what is good for one is often good for all, in addition to looking to their peers for learning and professional development opportunities (Strauss & Howe, 2007). The millennial’s commitment to being group-oriented and willingness to collaborate separates them from a reputation of being self-centered or incapable of sacrifice. Instead they prefer not to stand out from their peers and lead only by example. They seek stream-lined resources that are easily accessible and in native formats, most of which they are already used to and comfortable with (Strauss & Howe, 2007). Millennial students expect all communication and information to be accessible and on-demand, as well as build communities around their similarities – rather than differences. As a result, their quest for achieving a well-balanced life has made them much more likely of having short attention spans and a reluctance to pursue endeavors that provide little value to their perceived greater good (Raines, 2003).

Generational Issues in Teaching and Advising

Technology and Learning
     The impact technology has on learning often impacts the success of both the student and instructor. Consequently, attention may be paid to what teachers need to know in order to incorporate technology in the classroom…but little attention is paid to how. Mishra and Koehler (2006) introduced the “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge” (TPCK) framework that compensates for this lack of focus on the how, and “goes beyond merely identifying problems with current approaches” and instead “offers new ways of looking at and perceiving phenomena and offers information on which to base sound, pragmatic decision making” (p. 1019). TPCK which incorporates “Technology” as a third emphasis in Shulman’s already widely popular “Pedagogical Content Knowledge” framework is described as:

      … the basis of good teaching with technology and requires an understanding of the representation of concepts using technologies; pedagogical techniques that use technologies in constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help redress some of the problems that students face; knowledge of students’ prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge and to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones (Mishra & Koehler, 2006, p. 1029).

The manner in which identifying how technology can be interwoven into pedagogy and content reverses the already widely accepted practice of forcing each into an already selected (or pre-determined) technology, regardless of potential effectiveness.

     In addition to re-examining how technology can be used to enhance learning, Selwyn (2007) states that little continues to be done in addressing the “limited, linear, and rigid terms” of how technology is currently being used in education. As a result, much of the innovation and creativity associated with developing successful instructional technology practices are often stifled by non-technological resistance and politics (Selwyn, 2007). Support and buy-in from faculty is also critical in ensuring that the role of technology continues to have a place in the effective classroom. Simply purchasing more technology will not increase effective use; instead a shift in confidence and strategy may be the most useful in fostering new and inventive technology integration practices (Surry & Land, 2000).

Technology in Education
     The impact technology has on education can be found at all levels, and with varying levels of success. Despite the obvious differences in student population, there are similarities that exist between higher education and K-12 schools regarding technology integration approaches. Hew and Brush (2007) describe barriers and strategies currently experienced in K-12 schools including overcoming lack of resources, developing a shared vision and plan for integration, as well as changing the attitudes, beliefs and ability levels of all those who use and learn with technology. These can be seen in higher education as well.

     Therefore there is a need for a systematic strategy and evaluation of technology’s role in education and faculty preparedness to best identify how to move forward in today’s classroom (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007). This includes efforts such as identifying how technology is currently being integrated in classrooms, what increases school and instructor adaptation, and defining long-term evaluation strategies. These are possible steps in assessing not only the state of educational technology, but also its promise (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007). Because there is no one educational experience that will fulfill a student’s need to use technology, nor technology-infused vision of teaching and learning for an instructor (Ertmer, Gopalakrishnan & Ross, 2001).  The best course of action for successful technology integration is to provide:

… realistic visions of what others have achieved, teachers may be motivated to begin their own journeys toward exemplary technology use. Only by working within teachers’ existing situations, can we truly expect best practice to be achieved (Ertmer, Gopalakrishnan & Ross, 2001).


     In order to effectively integrate technology into the college classroom we must consider the student and their requirements as adults, and as millennials.  The challenge for us as faculty is to align these learning theories with the ingenuity of ourselves and others to maximize the learning experience for our students.


     The purpose of this exploratory study was to identify and gather examples of the current practices and future plans of college faculty members who are currently integrating technology into their classrooms. There are three research questions this project will investigate:

  1. How are faculty currently integrating technology into their classrooms?
  2. Of the technologies faculty are integrating into the classroom, which do they judge to be most effective and why?
  3. Which technologies would faculty like to integrate into their classrooms in the future?

     The participants for this study were post-secondary faculty who are integrating technology into their non-100% online classes. Participant selection did not use random sampling, but instead identified as many faculty members as possible who were currently using technology in their classrooms. As a result, participation in the study was solicited by posting invitations to participate on several discussion boards and listservs focused on using technology in education settings, as well as by direct email to technology-using faculty known to the researchers. All participants were also encouraged to forward information related to the participating in the study on to other faculty known to be using technology in the classroom.

Data Gathering and Analysis
     Data for this study were gathered in two ways, through an online survey and through the recording of examples or stories of how faculty integrated technology into their classrooms. All participants completed an online survey that collected both demographic information and qualitative data on how and why they are integrating technology into their classroom.

     At the end of the survey participants were asked to share, in more detail, examples or stories of how and why they are integrating technologies into their classes. Knowing that some faculty may have a preference to share these stories verbally, rather than in written form, participants had the choice of writing their stories as part of a survey or completing the survey and then calling an online answering service to share their stories verbally. These recorded verbal stories were then transcribed and emailed back to the participant for member checking and editing.

     Demographic information was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data was analyzed for emergent themes in technology, use, and pedagogical intent.


Demographic Information
     A total of 106 participants completed the survey. The majority of participants were from institutions within the United States (83%) coming from the Central (36%), Eastern (27%), and Western (20%) regions of the U.S. Participants were almost exclusively from four year institutions with slightly more coming from public (49%) than private institutions (40%), as well as 11% coming from two year institutions. Most of the participants represented smaller institutions with 40% having an enrollment of less than 5,000 (Table 1).
[See Table 1]

     Participants represented 20 different subject areas (Table 2) with the most participants in Educational Technology/Instructional Technology (28%) and Business/Management/Leadership (11%). Years of experience teaching in higher education averaged just over 14 years although the answers ranged from 1 to 40 years.
[See Table 2]

Most Effective Technologies currently used in the Classroom
     Eighty-two participants described 266 effective technologies that they currently integrate into their higher education classrooms. During analysis this qualitative data was consolidated into technology categories. The data was then further grouped into three broad purposes of use: technology to support teaching & information sharing, technology to support collaboration, and technology to support individual use for learning (Table 3). Most of the mentions of technology were to support teaching or collaborative learning with only 17% of the technologies mentioned being for individual learning.
[See Table 3]

     Support teaching & information sharing. The 113 mentions of technology to support teaching and information sharing were described as helping faculty prepare to teach by using the internet and related resources such as Slideshare, graphic, photo and audio resources, and online quizzes. These technologies also helped faculty to enhance the in-class experience by using the internet as an “on the spot fact checker and question answerer” (Survey respondent). Faculty also used PowerPoint slides of their own or from Slideshare, computer projectors, smart boards, and clickers to “enhance lectures” (Survey respondent), illustrate key points, and bring discussion and interaction into the classroom. Videos and other internet resources were used to supplement the experience in the classroom and Second Life was used to create a hands-on, visceral experience as part of the classroom experience, but “without leaving home” (Survey respondent). Finally, the in-class learning experience was supplemented and extended outside the classroom by creating new and replayable lectures with capture software, faculty-created or other-created podcasts, and interaction with “experts at a distance” (Survey respondent).

     Collaboration technologies. Although occasionally used in class, the 108 mentions of technologies used for collaboration were primarily described as supplements or extensions to the classroom experience. Some of these technologies were used as tools for students and faculty to have real-time, synchronous collaboration outside the typical classroom environment through real-time creation and editing of documents, as well as working together through videoconferencing such as Skype and chat. Most of these collaborative technologies, however, were used as asynchronous tools for collaboration. Using these tools students and faculty were able to share thoughts, ideas, and conversations back and forth through discussion boards, blogs, wikis, voicethreads, Twitter and email/voicemail. They were also able to use knowledge sharing tools like Delicious, Diigo, and hashtagging in other tools such as Twitter to identify, as they worked, the resources they found to be interesting and useful.

     Individual technologies. The 45 technologies mentioned in this category were described as a way to support student assignment and project work. Equipment such as computers, digital cameras and recorders, scanners, iPods; and software such as mapping, inspiration, and image editing helped students complete assignments or create projects for class and in some subject areas provided them with hands-on experience with the tools of the field. Other resources such as e-reserves and file exchange provided faculty and students with updated tools for handling the traditional tasks of reading packets and paper grading/returning. E-portfolios gave students with a structure to document their learning and skill development throughout their college experience, in addition to being able to easily share their work with future employers and colleagues.

     Why these technologies are effective. When asked why they consider these technologies effective, a few participants commented that technology offered the ability to ease logistical barriers for faculty and student:

“…help students access course materials immediately.”
“Allows students to access their own timelines…”
“Allows organization and opens class to outside resources.”
“Saves paper.”
However, most of the reasons faculty gave for why these technologies were effective had to do with the effectiveness of the instruction and the learning experience for the students:
“…these technologies engage students in the learning.”
“Variety enhances learning. What is effective for one student may not be as effective for another.”
 “…promotes collaboration and communication within a constructivist environment.”
 “students can’t sit back and listen…they must engage.”
 “…provides a transparent nature to the learning in class. It is easy for students to share work and thoughts and for others to provide feedback.”

     Finally, several participants stated that “[technologies] are not an end, but a means to further my pedagogical goals” (Survey respondent).

New Technologies for the Classroom
     Participants were asked what technologies they plan to use in their classroom within the next year. They were also asked to consider if money, time and support were not an issue, which technologies would they like to include in the classroom?  The results to both questions were analyzed and consolidated into groupings of similar technologies (Table 4).

     Looking at the one year plans in Table 4, there is a focus on collaboration and learner generated/shared content. Participants described a desire for more collaboration and to foster a learning community including sharing knowledge and resources of faculty, external experts, students and alumni. They described plans to use this technology for digital storytelling, such as CSI-type projects where technology will be used as an investigative tool and video and audio analysis of student focus groups and practice counseling sessions. This collaborative approach, along with the mobile and non-classroom based technologies listed in Table 4, blur the lines between in-class and out of class learning. Several participants expressed a desire to move to blended (partly traditional classroom and partly online or distributed learning) or fully online classes. Responses also indicated an openness toward technology use and a willingness to “try anything I discover or about which my students tell me” (Survey respondent), while at the same time, “also emphasizing the potential usefulness of older technologies that people are already familiar with” (Survey respondent).

     One striking aspect of the wish-list question (where money, time and support were not concerns), was that 11 of the respondents said there was no technology they would wish for and four respondents said they “couldn’t think of anything” for this category. But for the participants who did respond, the wish-list technologies again strongly reflect a desire for the collaboration and connection of students and others.

     The technology rated highest among both the one year and wish list technologies was high quality at-the-desk video/web conferencing. Participants described using web conferencing to connect faculty to students for remote advising, lecturing and working sessions; connecting experts to students, student discussion groups to students in other colleges and countries, connecting existing professionals to pre-professional students, and to conduct virtual field trips, thereby connecting the student to the world and the world to the student.
[See Table 4]

Stories of Faculty Use of Technologies in the Classroom.
     Participants were asked to provide up to four specific stories on how they use technology in the higher education classroom. The purpose of gathering these stories was not to find the most impressive or advanced use of technology in the higher education classroom; but rather to find what faculty are doing that works so these ideas can be shared with others for potential use in their classrooms.

     Each of the stories fell into two broad categories: stories that described how the faculty used technology in the classroom, and stories of how faculty had students use technology in the classroom. The stories in these two categories were further grouped into subcategories in an attempt to organize the data through common themes. There were a total of 120 stories shared by participants; far too many to share in this article. Three stories are listed below. A full list of stories organized by sub-categories is available at

     Story 1: Posting information online for peer/faculty feedback. I have had a good experience using wikis for class presentations. Students must first post an outline an annotated bibliography, which receives a mark. They then replace the outline with a completed paper, which is heavily marked. Finally, they post their revised paper. They are also required to make helpful comments on the papers of others.   I enjoy teaching with wikis because I become the editor rather than the teacher. When I mark a student's wiki page, my comments reflect this:  "Your paragraphs must be more concise, readers won't understand your argument" or "You must use a more compelling topic sentence if you want people to read your post."  Rather than being the judge of the worth of a student's writing, I am a coach, a supporter.    I feel, and I believe the class feels, that we are working together on a project, and we all have a stake in its success. (Faculty, Women’s Studies and English).

     Story 2: Online collaboration. I try to create a class environment based on social constructivist theory (e.g. Vygotsky), so students are involved in identifying specific topics of study through the use of Problem Based Learning. Groups determine how they want to investigate a topic and the resources they will use. I make available materials in a variety of formats, such as print materials, video, selected web sites, and people/experts. The students individually and collectively choose what to use (and are not limited to the initial resources I share). Student groups also determine how they want to communicate within their group--email, Blackboard group area, face-to-face meetings outside class, phone, text, etc. Students also choose the technology they want to use to teach peers (e.g. PowerPoint, simulations, video, audio, picture, etc.) All groups use some forms of technology during the research phase (e.g. web), but there are no requirements for use. (Faculty, Special Education).

     Story 3: Connect with others. My favorite for this year was during a discussion of the role of research at the modern University. It was weekend class, and during the weekend the Researchers at the University of California were preparing biological slides. It is a process where   they take very thin slices of tissue, and mount them onto glass plates for future analysis. The researchers broadcast their work live on the internet, and this class checked in from time, to time, to see how they were progressing. It is an opportunity for students to make a very real connection with the role of medical research at the modern university. Many of them commented on this in their weekly journals. (Faculty, Research and History).


     This study focused on current practices and future plans of college faculty members who are actively integrating technology into their classrooms. We found a broad range examples of technology integration into the classroom from faculty in a variety of subject areas, and with a variety of years of teaching experience. These uses of technology fell into three broad categories: using the technology to teach and share information, using the technology to foster collaboration, and using the technology for individual learning, information access, and skill demonstration.

     Of equal importance to how faculty use technology was why they felt it was effective. Through the multitude of answers several themes emerged. Faculty expressed that using technology is engaging because it allows for and often forces interaction on the part of the student. That technology can foster discussion, interaction and engagement among students and between the students and faculty. Also, that “education is more than being a sage on the stage" (Survey respondent) and that using technology can allow the faculty member to take the role of a collaborator rather than merely a judge of the learning. As a result, increased collaboration was used as evidence of the effectiveness of technology; increased collaboration among students and with faculty, as well as with other peers, experts, and professionals. The technology was also said to be effective because of the resource access and evaluation potential of technology. Students were able to demonstrate learning by creating online portfolios, as well as creating and posting other information online for the benefit and feedback of others.

     It is not surprising that technology use that creates an environment of engagement, collaboration and resource access is judged by faculty as effective. This parallels adult learning theory which tells us that adults want an environment where they can contribute to and learn from others in a pragmatic, results oriented, and problem focused way (Knowles, 1980). It also fits with the archetype of the millennial generation student who wants to contribute and develop, while working in a group-oriented, connected environment with ready access to information and communication on his/her own timeline (Strauss & Howe, 2007). The integration of current and future technology in the classroom seems an easy way to address the needs of these millennial-adult learners. Easier in the sense that these technologies can be effective tools for learning; but difficult in that these tools, like all tools, are only as effective as the educator who uses.

     Finally, it is interesting to note that most of the technologies and their applications listed by faculty who want to use them in one year or beyond (Table 4) are already being used effectively by faculty elsewhere (Table 3). This study did not inquire into how faculty learned or decided to integrate technology into their teaching. However, it seems we have a great opportunity to share these effective practices of using technology in the classroom with others. Rather than operating as islands of innovation, we need to find a way to connect with other faculty on our own campus and beyond in order to learn from each other. This should not only be about the technology…but also about how to use the technology to enhance the learning experience of our students. By sharing our knowledge and best practices with each other we can create even better practices for both ourselves and our students.

Recommendations for Further Research

     This project is just one step towards assisting faculty in effectively integrating technology into their teaching. Faculty and others on campus will benefit from additional research such as, (1) gathering examples and more richly described stories from faculty that can serve as inspiration for others. There are many more ways, big and small, that faculty use technology in the classroom in addition to the 120 stories collected in this study. (2) Faculty would also benefit by hearing examples of how others are using technology to support learning in specific disciplines. (3) It is likely there are reasons faculty are not integrating technology into their teaching, or not integrating technology as effectively as they would like into their teaching. Understanding these reasons and barriers will make it easier to minimize or eliminate them.


     As faculty we are obligated and committed to create effective learning experiences for our students. Current (and future) technologies have enormous potential as tools to enrich the learning for our students in a way that is pedagogically sound and that appeals to adults and the current millennial generation student.


Ertmer, P. and Gopalakrishnan, S. and Ross, E. (2001). Comparing Perceptions of Exemplary Technology Use to Best Practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33-5.

Hew, K. F and Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55-3, 223-252.

Knowles, M. (1980). The Modern Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagogy and Andragogy. New York, NY: Cambridge.

Lawless, K. A., and Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional Development in Integrating Technology Into Teaching and Learning: Knowns, Unknowns, and Ways to Pursue Better Questions and Answers. Review of Educational Research, 77-4, 575-

Mishra, P., and Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108-6, 1017-1054.

Raines, C. (2003). “Managing Millennials”. In Connecting generations : the sourcebook for a new workplace. Menlo Park, Calif: .Crisp Publications.

Selwyn, N. (2007). The use of computer technology in university teaching and learning: a critical perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 83-94.

Strauss, W. and Howe, N. 2007. Millennials go to college (2nd Ed.) Great Falls, VA: Life Course Associates.

Surry, D. and Land, S. (2000). Strategies for Motivating Higher Education Faculty to Use Technology. Innovations in Education and Training International, 37-2, 145-153.


Table 1
Participant School Population Size

Students Percentage of Participants (n=106)

< 5,000       40%
5,001 – 15,000       27%
15,001 – 25,000       14%
25,001 – 35,000         8%
>35,000       11%


Table 2
Participant Subject Areas

Subject area
Percentage of Participants (n=106)

Educational Technology/Instructional Technology 27.7%
Business, Management, Leadership 10.9%
Education 7.9%
Sociology, anthropology 6.9%
Computer Science 5.9%
English 5.9%
Science 5.9%
Arts, Art History 5.0%
History 5.0%
Languages/ESL 3.0%
Counseling 2.0%
Journalism 2.0%
Nursing, OT 2.0%
Political Science 2.0%
Psychology 2.0%
Research 2.0%
Communication 1.0%
Library Science 1.0%
Social Work 1.0%
Faculty Development 1.0%

Table 3
Most Effective Technologies Currently Integrated into the Classroom by Faculty

Number of participants mentioning this technology (n=82)
Support teaching & Information sharing  
  Video                      28
  Powerpoint/Keynote/Slideshare                      23
  Internet (resource, music, photos)                      19
  Lecture capture / screen capture                      10
  SmartBoard                        8
  Podcasts                        7
  Audience response system/Clickers                        5
  Video/computer projector                        5
  Second Life/Virtual world                        4
  Online quizzes/tests                        2
  Other, 1 mention each
Graphics, Interaction with expert
  CMS/LMS                      25
  Discussion board/Forum                      14
  Web 2.0 collaborative                      12
  MS Office/Google apps  & docs                      10
  Video conferencing/ web conferencing                      10
  Blogs                        9
  Wiki                        9
  Knowledge/Resource sharing tools                        4
  Email/Voicemail                        3
  Chat                        2
  Flickr/Flickr Groups                        2
  Google Groups                        2
  Voicethread                        2
  Other, 1 mention each
Group webpages, Research support, Twitter, University created online tools
  Computer/laptop                        7
  Digital camera, video & still                        6
  Document camera                        4
  Movie & image editing                        4
  Inspiration/Kidspiration                        3
  Mapping software                        3
  Dashboard for aggregation                        4
  e-portfolio                        2
  Online journal databases                        2
  Speech to text software                        2
  Survey software                        2
  Other, 1 mention each
Database mgmt software, Digital recorder, e-Reserves, File exchange, iPhone/iPod Touch, Scanner

Table 4
Technologies planned for the classroom within 1 year and if money, time and expertise were not a factor.

Plan to use within 1 year (n=79 ) If  money, time, support not a concern
Support teaching & Information sharing    
  Audience response system/Clickers            8            2
  Podcasts            8            2
  Lecture capture/screen capture            7            0
  Mobile delivery/ apps            7            7
  Second Life/Virtual world            4            2
  SmartBoard            3            5
  Augmented reality            2            1
  Online quizzes/tests            2            1
  eBooks            1            2
  Online simulations            1            0
  Stream classes live            1            5
  Wiki          10            0
  Video conferencing/ web conferencing            9          12
  Blogs            8            0
  Voicethread            4            1
  Google docs            3            0
  Social networking            2            1
  Twitter            1            0
  CMS/LMS            0            6
  Geo-tagging            0            1
  Web device for every student (iPad)            0            9
  Wireless campus            0            1
Individual learning    
  Digital camera            5            6
  Specialized software            4            0
  Digital recorder            1            0
  Computer in every classroom            0            1
  e-portfolio            0            3
  One-on-one help integrating tech in my class            0            2
  Satellite dish            0            1
Home | About NSSA | Membership Form | Conferences & Seminars | Publications | Officers & Board | Newsletter | Announcements | Contact Us
Site Map | Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy
Designed by Dreamwirkz Web Designs 2010-2011 All Rights Reserved