The Future Role Of Instructional Technology In Agricultural Education In North Carolina And Virgina

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess teachers' perceptions regarding the future of instructional technology in secondary school agricultural education programs in North Carolina and Virginia. A stratified random sample was selected from the populations of agricultural education teachers in North Carolina and Virginia. Likert-type scales were used to measure the future role instructional technology will play in agricultural education programs, the potential benefits of instructional technology, and the potential barriers to the use of instructional technology. In general, teachers in both states were "undecided" about the future role of instructional technology in agricultural education programs. Accessing lesson plans via the Internet was the primary way teachers perceived themselves using instructional technology in the future. Teachers in both states perceived an array of benefits from future use of instructional technology in their programs, including teacher access to information resources as the primary benefit. To a large extent, teachers were undecided about barriers to future use of instructional technology in their programs. Teachers in both states identified the cost of equipment and the cost of software as the greatest barriers.

Teachers’ Opinions About Virtual Reality Technology in School-based Agricultural Education

“…Within each of these contexts, VR technology found its place as a method to help provide initial exposure to subject matter and to positively reinforce skill development. Alston et al (2003) found SBAE teachers expressed mixed perceptions about VR technology in SBAE. Since Alston et al's (2003) study, VR technology has changed considerably and has become more widely accepted and used in educational settings (Bailenson, 2018;Potkonjak et al, 2016).…”

“…Barriers such as cost may inhibit educational technology adoption and use (Alston, Miller, & Williams, 2003;Coley, Warner, Stair, Flowers, & Croom, 2015;Williams et al, 2014b), which may result in missed opportunities for progress and change. Kotrlik, Redmann, and Douglas (2003) cautioned "that much more needs to be done to encourage and support [SBAE] teachers in the teaching/learning process" (p. 88).…”

Teaching with Technology: North Carolina Agriculture Teachers’ Knowledge Acquisition, Attitudes, and Identified Barriers

“…Rogers (2000) found the lack of availability and accessibility of technology to teachers was one reason for the lack of use. McKendrick, Straquadine, and Hubert (2002) and Alston, Miller, & Williams (2003) both identified inadequate funding as a major barrier to integrating technology. Another moderate to major barrier to technology integration identified by 68.43% of teachers was time to develop lessons that use technology.…”

“…Rogers (2000) found the lack of availability and accessibility of technology to teachers was one reason for the lack of use. Alston, Miller, and Williams (2003) identified cost of software and equipment as the greatest barriers to integrating technology. Other identified barriers include a lack of access to reliable technology (An & Reigeluth, 2011;Inan & Lowther, 2010;Petko, 2012), limited planning time (An & Reigeluth, 2011, Kotrlik & Redmann, 2009b, not enough technology to accommodate students, scheduling constraints, and lack of appropriate technical support (Kotrlik & Redmann, 2009a, Kotrlik & Redmann, 2009b.…”

Secondary agricultural educators' validation of selected agricultural mechanics objectives in Wisconsin

“…Many models and methods can be used for collecting the information necessary to establish competency models in agriculture education programs. Alston, Miller, and Williams (2003) stated, "The profession of agricultural education has a clear philosophy with several distinguishing tenants. Emphasis is placed on solving problems in real-world settings, learning by doing, individualized learning, career guidance, leadership and citizenship development, and community-oriented programs" (Phipps & Osborne, 1988).…”