Interchange (2015) 46:169185

DOI 10.1007/s10780-015-9240-z

Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools:

A Voice from Educational Leaders with a Freire Echo

Jane P. Preston Sean Wiebe Martha Gabriel

Alexander McAuley Barbara Campbell

Ron MacDonald

Received: 21 May 2014 / Accepted: 7 February 2015 / Published online: 15 May 2015
 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Abstract The purpose of this study is to document the perceptions of school

leaders pertaining to the benefits and challenges of technology in high schools
located on Prince Edward Island (PEI) (Canada). For this qualitative study, we
interviewed 11 educational leaders representing the PEI Department of Education,
principals, vice-principals, and department heads. Most participants indicated that
technology activated reverse mentorship among teachers and students, and tech-
nology positively affected student motivation. In contrast, the participants recog-
nized there were challenges regarding the impact of technology at the high school
level. The challenges identified were inappropriate texting, decline of literacy skills,
policy and lack of policy, and increased workload regarding communication with
parents. Herein, we apply Freirean perspectives, which promotes social advocacy, to
understand how these benefits and challenges interrelate.

Keywords Technology
Freire
Reverse mentorship
Texting

Introduction

Due to societys fast-paced adoption of technology, information accessible

throughout the world is doubling every 2 years (Gantz and Reinsel 2011). Prensky
(2012) stated that the current generation of young learners will live in a future where
technology will be over a trillion times more powerful and influential than it is
today. Not only is the current uber-focus on technology changing communicative
networks throughout postindustrial societies, this technological movement has
major implications within public education and, more precisely, for teachers. A core

J. P. Preston (&)
S. Wiebe
M. Gabriel
A. McAuley
B. Campbell
R. MacDonald

University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, Canada
e-mail: jpreston@upei.ca

123
170 J. P. Preston et al.

responsibility of any teacher is to ensure that students possess the knowledge and
abilities needed to be productive, involved citizens, who can think critically about
the world and their place in it, both now and in the future (Peim 2001). Since
technology will continue to be of great importance in the future, teachers have a
responsibility to incorporate digital learning into modern-day classrooms. This
approach to learning is supported and stimulated through student-centered
pedagogy, a type of teaching where technological tools have value. Formally
fusing an inquiry-based style of teaching and learning with technology is a process
that has been identified as e-learning (Clark and Mayer 2011), e-teaching (Nawaz
et al. 2011) and e-pedagogy (Kuriloff 2005). Regardless of the nuances associated
with these e-related terms, a new type of teaching and learning is emerging in
Kindergarten to Grade 12 classrooms, and this change is dependent on technology.
The purpose of this study is to document the perceptions of school leaders regarding
the benefits and challenges of incorporating technology in high schools located on
Prince Edward Island (Canada).
As a part of this paper, we incorporate Freirean theory to analyze views of
participants. In the 1960s, Freire developed Brazilian literacy programs dependent
issues of grassroots politics, social justice, and critical pedagogy. Despite the fact
that many scholars apply Freirean concepts to their research in the realm of
education, almost no attention has been paid to examining his views specifically
with regard to educational technology. In such a fashion, this research builds upon
the few studies that have linked Freirean philosophy with technology (e.g., Blikstein
2008; Kahn and Kellner 2007).
For this paper, we apply Freires ideas to digital literacy and its effect on policy
and the social wellbeing of students and the larger community. More specifically,
we use a Freirean perspective to interrogate how perceptions from educational
leaders can enable positive change with regard to the use of technology among
student. As will be explicated, a condition common to both the benefits and
concerns of technology is that there exists a struggle in redefining what is valued in
education. Part of this struggle includes articulating how and in what ways students
and teachers define their roles and purposes. Employing a Freirean perspective
brings theoretical coherence to these struggles.

Literature Scan: Benefits and Challenges of Technology

When thinking about technology and high school students, a phrase that almost
instantly surfaces in the minds of many educators is cell phone. Indeed, there has
been an unprecedented rise in the use of cell phones among young learners (All the
Worlds a Game 2011; Lenhart et al. 2010; Rideout et al. 2010). In turn, educational
leaders across Canada have responded with policies targeting acceptable cell phone
use in schools. For example, in May 2011, the Toronto District School Board
(Ontario) rescinded the ban on student cellphone use, a prohibition it had previously
enacted in 2007. As a result, under the teachers discretion, students are able to use
their cellphones in class-related activities (OToole 2011). Within Prince Edward
Island, a similar event occurred. Although cell phones were banned in public

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 171

schools in 2007, students are currently allowed to use cell phones during class for
educational activities under the direction of their teacher (Montague Regional High
School 20122013). Even though teacher acceptance of cell phone as tools in the
learning process is on the rise in Canada, on a global level, integrating cell phones
and other student-owned technological devices into classroom activities remains
frowned upon (Johnson et al. 2011; Lenhart et al. 2010; Nielsen and Webb 2011).
Regardless of policy, cell phone use has potential to promote student-directed
learning. For example, most cell phones are capable of recording directions for
assignments, recording students presentations, and responding to classroom polls
and quizzes. With an Internet connection, cell phones are capable of providing data
for research questions and projects (Nielsen and Webb 2011; Tatar and Robinson
2003). Equipped with a digital camera, cell phones can visually document
photographic steps to a science experiment, visually summarize learning acquired
during field trips, supply pre-taken photos as visual tools to be used in class projects.
Viewed as a type of mini-computer, cell phones are no longer a classroom
distraction; rather, when used constructively, they can be a powerful tool to support
student learning.
In addition to cell phone use, the incorporation of iPads, Smartboards, and social
media has shown to foster learning and motivate students (Pennington 2010; Saine
2012). In particular, the touch-screen iPad and tablets are ideal for children with
limited fine-motor skills (Shah 2011). Downloading specific programs or educa-
tional applications (aka apps) on these touch-screen devices can improve
communication and promote independence of children with learning differences
such as autism, apraxia, and Downs Syndrome (Ploog et al. 2013; Shah 2011). With
regard to Smartboards, research has shown that these interactive whiteboards have
improved student behavior and motivation (Min and Siegel 2011; Schmid 2008;
Smith et al. 2005; Winzenried et al. 2010). Social media (e.g., Twitter, Facebook,
etc.) and other online tools such as e-portfolios, class blogs, and TeacherTube have
also been shown to promote collaborative learning, self-paced exploration, and
engagement during the learning process (Dunn 2012; Shaltry et al. 2013). When
used appropriately, technology and social media can be highly effective tools to
support student learning.
Associated with the increased use of technology, particularly among young
learners, is the concept of reverse mentorship (November 2010) or reciprocal
mentorship (Gabriel and Kaufield 2008). Reverse or reciprocal mentorship1 relates
to a learning-related situation where a younger individual teaches, mentors, and/or
offers advice to a more experienced individual, a process which, in turn, assist both
parties. Because the majority of current teachers are digital immigrants (i.e., people
who did not grow up with technology) (Prensky 2001), it is imperative that these
educators call upon the leadership, knowledge, and reverse mentorship of the Net
Generation (i.e., a person who grew up witnessing the genesis and/or proliferation of
the Internet). Levinson (2010) explained that while adults tend to view technology
as a source of information, students see technology as a way of life and as an

1
For the purpose of this abridged literature review, we view reverse and reciprocal mentorship as
synonymous.

123
172 J. P. Preston et al.

entertainment and socializing tool. As compared to most teachers, students are less
intimidated by technology. Teachers need to be open to gaining knowledge from
their students, and students need to be called upon to mentor teachers on how to use
social media and other forms of technology (November 2010).
In addition to research pertaining to the benefit of technology, studies have
documented some of the inherent challenges associated with technology. Parents,
teachers, educational leaders, and researchers have voiced concerns about how
technological is affecting safety and privacy of students and how technology is the
changing literacy and social skills of students (Gabriel et al. 2012). A particular
concern relates to a lifestyle transformation. Rideout et al. (2010) indicated that, in
2009, American adolescents spent an average of 7.4 h every day, 7 days a week
with media devices. This extreme exposure to technology is linked to a reduction in
physical activity and a higher risk of obesity in youth. On an intellectual level, also
associated with this hyper-connectedness with media, Small and Vorgan (2008)
indicated that adolescents have become experts in skimming and scanning for
information. Many authors believe that this uber focus with media is negatively
affecting the attention span and the cognitive abilities of young learners (Carr 2010/
2011; Jackson 2008; Small and Vorgan 2008; Sprenger 2009; Wolf and Barzillai
2009). Small and Vorgan (2008) stipulated that although experiencing a techno-
logically rich environment can increase motivation and boost creativity, it also
sparks grave societal concerns including the meteoric rise in attention deficit
disorder (ADD) diagnoses, increased social isolation of youth, and Internet
addiction among youth. Further, students with a ubiquitous access to the Internet
have a greater chance of being cyber bullied, which can lead to student anxiety,
depression, and even bullycide (Marr and Field 2001; Shariff 2008).

Methodology and Data Sources

In planning, conducting, and analyzing this qualitative study, we used a

constructivist approach to research (Lincoln and Guba 2013), which endorses that
knowledge is socially constructed and changeable depending on circumstances.
Furthermore, for this research, we adopted a relativist ontology, whereby multiple,
equally viable constructions of realities exist simultaneously (Denzin and Lincoln
2011). This constructivist philosophy also dictates that both meaning and reality are
co-constructed by the melding of participant perceptions and experiences and by the
researcher interpretations of these perceptions and experiences (Denzin and Lincoln
2011; Lincoln and Guba 2013; Yin 2011). In turn, the findings of research supply a
holistic, subjective, experiential description of real-life events.
Another important detail of this research pertains to participant selection and our
explanation of participants as leaders. Many researchers define school educational
leaders as people who assume government positions, the principalship, and the vice-
principalship. For our research, we incorporated these three formal levels of
leadership, but we also recognized department heads as a position of leadership. By
including department heads as leaders, not only do we acknowledging leadership in
a broader, more inclusive fashion, the results of the study represent a more

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 173

encompassing style of leading, which, we believe is aligned with Freires

philosophical views of human behaviors.
Providing additional details about the site selection and context for this study
helps the reader more fully understand the findings of this research and potentially
transfer these findings to similar settings (Ary et al. 2006; Lincoln and Guba 1985).
During the recruitment stage, email invitations were sent to approximately ten
people employed within the Prince Edward Island Department of Education and
Early Childhood Development. From these invites, two people volunteered. Across
the province of Prince Edward Island, at the time of the study, there were ten
English high schools. Email invitations were sent to principals, vice-principals, and
department heads in all ten high schools. Of the 40? invitation sent, nine people
volunteered to participate in this study; these nine participants represented six of the
ten high schools, which had student populations from approximately 5001000
students per school. All high schools were located within one school board, which
enrolled approximately 19,000 Kindergarten to Grade 12 students.
In total, 11 people volunteered for this study. Two participants represented the
Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, one participant was
a principal, three participants were vice-principals, and five participants were
department heads/teachers. All vice-principals and department heads assumed
both leadership roles within the school and classroom teaching responsibilities. A
summary of the participants and their pseudonyms names are displayed in
Table 1.
With regard to the sample size, Creswell (2014) indicated that, typically,
qualitative research involves a limited number of individuals (i.e., 140), because
with a small sample size, the researcher can collect much detail from each
individual. This point held true for this study. With each interview lasting almost
1 h, approximately 11 h of discussion focused on the benefits and challenges the

Table 1 Participants
Name Professional representation

Ella Department of Education & Early Childhood Development

Jack Department of Education & Early Childhood Development
Maggie Principal
Mary Vice-Principal/Teacher
Noah Vice-Principal/Teacher
Tyler Vice-Principal/Teacher
Ava Department Head/Teacher
Carter Department Head/Teacher
Evan Department Head/Teacher
Katie Department Head/Teacher
Zoe Department Head/Teacher

123
174 J. P. Preston et al.

technology in high school was collected. Moreover, Merriam (2009) explained that,
for qualitative research, there is no right number of participants. Rather, the number
of participants depends on the questions asked, the data gathered, and the resources
available. In the case of this research, a criterion of participants was that they
needed to be employed within the Department of Education (with a focus on
technology), or they needed to be formal educational leaders within a high school.
We exhausted the available resources by interviewing every volunteer participant
who met this criterion. Furthermore, we believe that the 11 participants was an ideal
number for this study because of data saturation (Lincoln and Guba 1985). After
interviewing the first eight or so participants, the answers provided by ensuing
participants became repetitive in content. That is, after the first eight or nine
participants, we were reaching saturation of content answers highlighting that we
possessed the data needed to answer the research purpose.
Another important aspect of this research pertains to details about the data
collection, analysis, and presentation. Data were collected over several months
through semi-structured individual interviews (Barbour and Schostak 2011). Ten of
the 11 interviews were conducted at the participants school or workplace, and one
interview was conducted at a local coffee shop. One participant provided written
answers to the interview questions, which were orally reviewed during a face-to-
face meeting. For the remaining ten participants, all interviews were audio-
recorded, and written copies of the interview transcripts were returned to each
individual. To promote data credibility, participants performed a member check of
their transcripts. To do so, they changed, altered, and/or deleted any information on
the transcript to ensure the meaning they intended to convey during the interview
was accurately presented in the written word (Lincoln and Guba 1985). After
participants reviewed their transcripts, the research team integrated all changes and
reviewed the final transcripts to create a preliminary list of key ideas, common-
alities, and differences, which converged into larger thematic patterns in response to
the studys purpose (Creswell 2013). Transcripts were then reread ensuring that the
data representing the themes were accurate. In the presentation of the findings, we
incorporated many verbatim quotations from participants, which supported the
trustworthiness of results (Yin 2011). To provide as much detail as possible, we
interspersed some of our interpreted summaries of participant views alongside
verbatim quotation (Yin 2011). To ensure transparency of results, the two draft
papers2 transpiring from the research were shared with all participants.

Thematic Results

Participants perceived that there were an array of benefits and challenges associated
with incorporating technology into high school classrooms. As reflected below, they
identified a greater number of challenges, as compared to benefits. Nonetheless, we
begin our thematic results on a positive note and present the benefits of technology
in high school.

2
In addition to this paper, one additional article ensued from this study (see Preston et al. 2015).

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 175

Benefits to Incorporating Technology into the Classroom

The two overarching themes encompassed the participants perceptions of the

benefits of technology in the classroom. They were the use of reverse mentorship
and increased student motivation during the learning process.

Reverse Mentorship

In line with the concept of reverse mentorship, all participants believed that students
brought much technological experience into the classroom. For example, Katie
explained that many of her students were comfortable with editing YouTube videos,
because, as their pastime, many students uploaded personal videos to the Internet.
Carter voiced his belief that students educate themselves about technological issues:
When they [the students] dont know how to do something, theyll go on
YouTube, and itll show them how to do it. They use that to teach themselves. Jack
said, They learn on a need-to-know basis and find expertise online or from
friends. Tyler said, They know more about what is going on [with technology]
than we do. Similarly, Ella believed I think they come with lots of great skills. I
dont think theres much that we could throw at them in terms of using the
computers that they couldnt handle or catch onto very quickly. Furthermore, Tyler
believed that young learners are more open to facing change:
How many 12-year-olds have taken a bike over a jump that may or may not
work out? Theyll take the risk, they dont know any better yet I guess its
the same way thinking about technology. No fear of anything in their lives;
theyll give it a go.
Zoe said, The students have a lot of technology. Whatever the newest phone or the
newest gadget, they have it. In sum, all participants recognize that students bring a
rich array digital experience to the classroom, and these students are not intimidated
to try new things related to technology.
In turn, most participants believed that teachers need to make use of the
technological experiences of their students. Although participants did not use the
term reverse mentorship, they recognized value in students helping the teachers.
Mary said, If theres a way that we [the teachers] can take the students incredible
acuity and knowledge and help them to help us, who do not necessarily have that
skill, that would be great. In Maggies school, reverse mentorship was active, as
the school staff invited several high school students to be part of the school staff
Computer Department Technology Team. On this topic, Maggie said, They [two
student leaders] help in any way they can when we have issues. For example, we
might have a substitute in who isnt clear on how to hook up something. In another
school, Ava described an example of how she welcomed reverse mentorship by
talking to students outside of class time:
I have a boy in my class who has these graphic calculators on his cell phone. I
asked him, How do I get that on my iPhone? He said, You cant, because
yours is an Android App not an Apple App so you cant get it on the iPhone.

123
176 J. P. Preston et al.

Fred saw technology as a type of springboard to promote reverse mentorship and

student leadership in his class: When something might go wrong, they [the
students] dont even give me a chance to correct it myself. Theyll tell me how to
correct it. Mary explained how she used reverse mentorship to nurture student
leadership: When I use one (the Smartboard) I say, Oh, darn, this doesnt seem to
work. Who can help me? And up the student goes, and Ive got them! Tyler said,
If you have difficulty with a program in class, as the teacher, sure enough one of
those 20 or 30 kids is going to know about it better than you. Its just the way it is.
Zoe added another aspect of the capacity for reverse mentorship: I think that the
young teachers are very techie, many of them. They are excellent to share what
theyve learned with us older teachers. In sum, participants recognized technology
as an opportunity for student to be involved with reverse mentorship, which
simultaneously activated student leadership.

Student Motivation

Many participants believed that incorporating technology into the learning process
enhanced the active learning and motivation of students. Evan explained how the
use of Science apps motivated his students: The books are old, and theyre static.
Through these apps, you trick them into reading, and even though the text is quite
lengthy, it doesnt seem as much like work to them. Fred explained that technology
transformed his teaching. Student went from viewing a photograph in an outdated
textbook to participation in virtual field trips: We can go on virtual tours of Egypt
or whatever, if youre teaching ancient history. You dont have to just look at a
3 9 4 picture in a text book. Tyler explained how he used the Smartboard to
enabled physical participation of students: I can get kids up to the [Smart]board to
build a molecule of DNA with all the constituents. They have to put it together
properly by pulling and dropping and dragging things into the right place and
actually building the molecule. Jack articulate the view of many participants when
he said, Technology empowers students and engages them in their learning.
Several participants expressed excitement specifically with regard to how
technology could support and promote students with special needs. Maggie said:
We know of the tactile nature of their learning and their style of learning
[students with special needs], and we will be better able to reach that type of
learning through technology. I think that simply having to touch a screen is
going to change things for them quite a bit.
Mary highlighted the how iPads have motivated students with special needs and
said, We have had an iPad for our special needs kids to use its been
illuminating to watch what non-verbal kids can do with this technology. It just lights
up their lives. Tyler explained how the schools resource teacher used the iPad
with her students: There are free apps that can help with student learning. For the
kids she is working with, its a tremendous motivator. Tyler also talked about his
own class, where a couple of boys with special needs kept digital notes on their
iPads. In sum, Tyler and other participants believed this option not only supported
and enabled student learning, but it facilitated a high level of learning.

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 177

Challenges Associated with Technology

Alongside the perceived benefit of technology, participants also spoke about the
dark side of technology (Mary). These negative issues included inappropriate
texting, policy or lack of policy related to technology, the erosion of traditional
literacy skills, and an increased workload for teachers.

Inappropriate Texting

In this study, vice-principals (Mary, Tyler, and Noah) were responsible for student
discipline within the school. In turn, these three participants had to deal with the
students sent to the office due to inappropriate texting. With regard to texting and its
challenges, Mary said, Many students dont understand what slander is and The
absolutely horrendous things that are said [in texts]. She continued by describing
the content of some texts:
Sometimes parents are attacking other peoples childrens to protect their own.
So they are sending nasty stuff to this childs parents. I say something to you
and your mother would send nasty stuff to me! Get your hands of [f] my
child you @*! Then the child comes in and says, Look, look what her
mother said to me! We call the RCMP and let them take it. Thats what we
usually do at that stage. Its not my job or the schools job to go after an adult
whos out of order. The staff knows nothing about that stuff, nothing.
She went on to explain how cell phones augment drug deals. Kids use their cell
phones [via texting] to set up drug buyseither to buy or sell, sometimes both.
She also talked about how cell phones empower crowds to gather in anticipation of a
student brawl. The cellphones [via texting], in particular, are coming into play so
that you have a crowd to watch a fight. You see, a fight isnt a fight, if there isnt a
crowd. She talked about how some students will not come to school, because they
are intimidated by texts they receive after school or in the middle of the night. She
provided more detail on this point:
We have a youth social worker and that is what he does all the timerun
interference with all the kids who have to deal with pressures, insults, and
threats of fighting due to texting. Things said like, Im going to get you at
school or Im going to beat your brains out or Dont talk to my friend
that way or look at my friend. They may not even be friends at all, just that
they know who each other is. It is just entangled; its just a mess. It could take
you all day to just get to the bottom of what started it. Normally it didnt start
in school, and, usually, its connected to a boyfriend or girlfriend. Yet, you
spend all day on it. By this time, theres usually a school population thats all a
buzz, and, if you dont cut it out, it becomes larger and larger and affects the
school.
In his position as the vice-principal, Noah also described challenges associated with
texting and cyber-bullying:

123
178 J. P. Preston et al.

We had a conversation with a kid twice last week, about the fact that he was
using texts, and he was being very inappropriate with his words. He said,
Well, I never said anything. They dont get it. They think because its in a
text, they didnt say it.
Noah explained that although inappropriate texting happens on the weekends or
weekday evenings, these issues are dragged into the school environment. At that
point, it becomes an educational issue. Noah continued by saying that many students
have anxiety attacks if their cell phone is taken away from them. Noah believed,
Students need to know more about the power of it [technology]. They need to
understand more about their responsibilities and whats appropriate and whats
inappropriate. In many ways, Noah expressed how students are ill-prepared to deal
with the inherent power of texting and cell phones.
Tyler also believed students have difficulty understanding that they are
responsible for the words they text. Taking ownership of whats been said is
difficult for students. They need to learn that what they say can lead to controversy,
and thats probably been the biggest problem with it. All three principals expressed
great concern about student general lack of digital awareness with regard to being
responsible for the words one uses within texts.

Policy and Lack of Policy

Participants described how both the implementation of some policies and the lack of
other policies were roadblocks toward enriching student learning via technology.
For example, across Prince Edward Island, some schools have Wi-Fi capacities,
while other schools do not. For schools that do have Wi-Fi, Technicians and
people who who fix our computers they currently have a policy where they
dont support the use of iPads among students (Ella). In this case, technology
policy deters these students from maximizing their learning with technology. For
schools that do not have Wi-Fi, there are limited benefits for students who bring
their iPads or other Internet-dependent gadget to school. Thus, in both cases, the
system and its policies do not enable students to benefit by bringing their digital
devices to school.
With regard to the provincial Teacher Federation and its protocols, teachers are
deterred from using any type of social media with students. Tyler explained, The
Federation advises us to stay away from social media, because it can create
complications, especially with the profession we are in. Because of advice from
the Teachers Federation and the school board, Noah explained, Facebook, Im not
using it. I dont think teachers would be using it too much either. On a similar note,
Mary said, The school board is struggling with how much technological contact
teachers should have with students. Should teachers be friends with kids on
Facebook? Should teachers be texting kids? That also means that kids cant be
texting teachers. However, Katie pointed out that for many sporting or school field
trips, teachers and students travel to different communities. During such trips,
teachers and students often text each other for reasons of safety and communication.

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 179

This example highlights complications related to a generalized policy around no

texting contact between teachers and students.
Related to lack of policy, Jack, Ava, and Fred talked about cloud storage issues.
Jack explained that currently students do not have cloud storage via school
computers. In turn, to enable technological use in the classroom, Policies relating
to the use of student information, cloud computing, and the PEI Freedom and
Privacy Act must be implemented. These tools will provide students with online
storage and productivity tools for use at school and at home (Jack). Ava described
her frustration with a lack of school policy related to Google when she said:
Theres an issue with Google Docs [GoogleDrive] being so public. It brings up
security and ethical issues they [the school district] still have to figure out. I
said, Oh my goodness, how are we going to share this if they dont have
access to Google Docs?
Fred described the need for policy related to cloud storage:
Students dont have access to the USB drives here either, because they can upload
a virus from home onto our computers. So thats kind of frustrating. They might
have a multimedia presentation they have to give to me. They do it in school, but,
on our G-drive, their account here wont have the space for modern software
needs. So they cant save it on their G-drive here in school. Then, they cant put it
on a USB stick either The only thing they can do is delete part of their project.
These data highlight the need for teachers to be supported with clear and prescribed
policy related to cloud storage in public education.

Erosion of Traditional Literacy and Social Skills

Over half of the participants believed that dependence on and use of technology is
whittling away the students traditional literacy skills such as spelling, grammar,
and creative writing. Maggie said, I see the erosion of the traditional conventions
due to the use of social media, punctuation, spelling, and grammar I think it is
affecting literacy and that there is a new literacy. Mary described aspects of this
new literacy, Their reality is that they dont write anymore They dont talk
anymore. They text. Mary went on to describe other aspects of this new literacy:
The English teachers are seeing this all the time. A capital UR, and they mean
youre. To them, thats how, how, you spell youre. LOL are all over the place.
You cant escape it, and it changed the way they communicate. Then, of
course, they have their codes so that if a parent does see their phone text, they
[the parents] cant understand what the student is talking about.
Katie was alarmed by the amount of code words that students were incorporating
into their examination papers. She provided an example. During a curriculum unit
on student leadership, Katie posed the following exam question: As leaders, would
you be willing to try something outside their comfort zone? Explain your answer
with details. A student comprehensive written response was, Well sure, YOLO!
[You Only Live Once].

123
180 J. P. Preston et al.

Many participants voiced their belief that technology was negatively affecting
many students social skills and attention spans. Ella was concerned about the negative
effective of student increasingly using their cell phones to text messages, instead of
personally talking to people. She believed, If youre not face-to-face, there seems to
be less responsibility for what you say. Both Maggie and Katie believed that
technology was an underlying reason why many students have a limited attention span
and want to be entertained by the teachers. Tyler believed that, due to technology,
many students have become impatient: They have a need for immediacy in feedback
just like with video games. Technology has to be used to keep up with that, otherwise
they get bored. Evan said, Rightly or wrongly, theyre being brought up in a society
where you basically can filter out anything that annoys you.

Increased Workload Regarding Communication with Parents

A point that most participants emphasized was that, due to technology, teachers
faced great demands to contact parents to share formative and summative evaluation
of students. Noah discussed the school districts digitalized student scheduling,
attendance, and evaluation programs. As a part of this program, teachers need to
submit student attendance within the first 15 min of class, and teachers upload
student marks for all assignments in a timely fashion. Through this program, parents
have instant access to most of this information once uploaded.
Noah stipulated that even though it was great that, due to technology, many
parents were better able to communicate with teachers, Teachers are saying,
Yeah, but I got 12 of them [parents] on the phone, and I dont have time to teach
and prepare my next day. Fred relayed a similar message:
Theres a lot more onus on the teacher to contact parents to make sure they
know, for better or for worse, that this is where their children are performing.
That takes time away from preparing to be a better teacher in the classroom.
Tyler explained that teachers have been provided with ongoing training on how to
use the school districts digitalized attendance and evaluation program; however,
such training takes time away from other forms of professional development. Katie
spoke about communication challenges she had with parents due to technology.
Katie, a sports coach, needed to change the after-school practice time of one her
sports sessions. She informed student players, but Katie did not have time to update
this change on the school website. An angry parent berated her, because the website
was not up-to-date. These examples highlight how technology can exacerbate time-
pressures already experienced by teachers, intensify timely communication with
parents, and, in general, increase the workload of teachers.

Discussion: Freire and Technology

From a Freirean perspective, the concept of benefits and challenges is notion of

interrelatedness. Freire understood that hierarchical roles are implicit in the learning
process. These roles, which pigeonhole a follower and a leader, impede equitable

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 181

change and development. Reciprocal mentorship is one way that such rigid and
debilitating institutional hierarchies can be challenged (Freire 1997a). A Freirean
type of learning environment foregrounds emancipatory pedagogy, or a recognition
of the need for essential equality among human beings, particularly within the
relationship between teachers and students (Freire 1972, 1973, 1996, 2004a). Many
participants in this research recognized that learners come to school with rich stores
of technological skills. Through reverse mentorship, teachers recognize the
technological astuteness of many students and, thereafter, draw upon the techno-
logical abilities of students as a threshold toward promoting open dialogue between
learners, where the learners represent teachers and fellow students. During this
collaboration, a community of learners is honored, and individuals, who may even
be reluctant or unable to offer critique, simultaneously are empowered. The finding
highlighted when teachers welcomed reverse mentorship from students, students
increased agency generated additional freedom to articulate practical, personally
relevant life experiences. This liberating agency embellishes the learning and
dialogue between teachers and students, therein creating a community of learners
with the purpose of building efficacy against domination. In an increasingly
technological world, the onus of education is the articulation of a human voice.
Focusing on the students empowerment to assist others is a strong feature of
valuing the ways communities of learners can persist against the power structures
that police and diminish them.
As early as the 1970s, Freire upheld the importance of teaching media literacy to
empower individuals against manipulation and oppression, and he believed that
appropriate media should be used to help teach the subject matter in question (Freire
1972, 1998). In connection to these convictions, Freire (1972) also warned
educators of the potential ills associated with technology when it is used as an
oppressive force. In such a fashion, Freire indirectly stipulated that the obvious and
latent powers of technology need to be taught to students. As related to the findings
of this study, particularly issue regarding inappropriate student texting, the lesson of
the obvious of latent powers of technology need to be more fully emphasized in
Prince Edward Island high school. To do so, both school policy and educators need
to promote curriculum and student learning imbued with a critical consciousness
regarding technology and society. Such open dialogue needs to include the topic of
digital literacy, juxtaposed with concepts of the oppressed and the oppressor. As
part of embodying critical pedagogy, teachers need to help students understand that
students are the subjects of their own lives, not the objects of someone elses story.
Those who do not acknowledge this, those who want to control and oppress are
committing a kind of epistemic violence (Dimitriadis and Kamberelis 2006,
p. 120). Such Freirean-laden concepts need to become core aspects of digital-
literacy dialogue within high school classrooms.
Freire (2004b) was particularly concerned with the naive optimism in
technologys ability to provide freedom. He commented on how technology can
feed the optimism of the political conservatives and their largely dehumanizing
agenda. On a similar note, Kahn and Kellner (2007) explained that societys impetus
towards technology and hegemonic practices are imploding into a culture of
technocapitalism, where technology is influenced by the priorities of capitalism.

123
182 J. P. Preston et al.

Freire (1972, 1997b, 1998) advocated a dialectical view of technology, where he

was hopeful that technology can be used to liberate people from the powerlessness
and inequalities. Meanwhile, Freire was cautious of technologys potential to be a
tool for domination and oppression. Thus, Freire (1973) said, The answer does not
lie in the rejection of the machine but in the humanization of man (p. 35). On a
positive note, the power of technology promoted teacher-student-parent commu-
nication, promoting opportunities for a greater participation in educative dialogue of
students. Interestingly, it was not the enhanced communication, per se, that
concerned participants; rather, it was the extra time commitment that this
technologically-stimulated communication demanded.
In contrast, Freirean concerns about technology and its potential to promote
powerlessness were mirrored within the hurtful texts, which paralyzed the freedom
of some students. Incorporating Frieres views means that, within a society, genuine
unity is dependent upon openness of individual differences, which technology can
support; however, the individuality and diversity of one cannot devalue the
individuality or openness of another, an aspect of technocapitalism. Again, Freire
(1972) reminded readers, It is not the media themselves which I criticize, but the
way they are used (p. 136). With regard to policy and lack of policy related to
technology in high schools, educational leaders would be wise to focus on the way
in which technology is used, not the tool itself.

Closing Remarks

The need for and impact of digital literacy in education cannot be downplayed. High
school students who are not sufficiently skilled to meet the digital requirements of
tomorrows job market will face serious consequences in the future and the social
wellbeing and economic prosperity of local, national, and international communities
will most likely be less than ideal. This study promotes the idea that current students
must be provided with a digital literacy that will help achieve their personal and
professional adults goals. Although many students have the digital literacy skills
required to use todays technology (e.g., laptops, iPad, iPhone, etc.), a mixture of
digital literacy skills and critical knowledge about digital literacy should be a central
part of students school experience. At local school and school district levels,
greater efforts must be made to entrench digital literacy into educational policies, so
that todays students will be able to effectively work, fluidly communicate, and fully
participate in an increasingly knowledge-based society. Furthermore, in promoting
digital literacy, teachers need to be empowered with professional development
focusing on e-learning, e-pedagogy, e-teaching, and critical pedagogy. Another
potential for promoting digital literacy of students is housed in universities.
Instructors teaching in Bachelor of Education programs need to role model
e-pedagogy and digital literacy within teacher candidates (Preston et al. 2015).
Jukes et al. (2010/2011) stated that the public education system is set up to
prepare students for a world that no longer exists (p. 19). Ohler (2009) said,
Being able to read and write multiple forms of media and integrate them into a
meaningful whole is the new hallmark of literacy (p. 9). Considering these quotes

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 183

and the findings of this study, future research questions beckon exploration. For
example, how do features of technology and reverse mentorship align with
technological-influenced classrooms? How are technological tools and social media
influencing the academic grading of students on high school English tests? In
promoting digitally literate students, how can educators incorporate Freires
ideologies of critical pedagogy? In what ways is technology influencing the
workload of teachers? These are just a few of many questions that arise from this
study.

Acknowledgments This study is part of a larger 3 year research project entitled A University-College-
Government-Industry Community Partnership to Transform Education for Employment in the Digital
Economy, funded by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

References

All the Worlds a Game. (2011). The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/
21541164.
Ary, D., Chester-Jacobs, L., Razavieh, A., & Sorensen, C. (2006). Introduction to research in education
(7th ed.). Toronto, ON: Thomson Wadsworth.
Barbour, R. S., & Schostak, J. (2011). Interviewing and focus groups. In B. Somekh & C. Lewin (Eds.),
Theory and methods in social research (2nd ed., pp. 6168). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Blikstein, P. (2008). Travels in Troy with Freire: Technology as an agent for emancipation. In C.
A. Torres & P. Noguera (Eds.), Social justice education for teachers: Paulo Freire and the possible
dream (pp. 205244). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Carr, N. (2010/2011). The jugglers brain. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(4), 814.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2011). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven Guidelines for
consumers and designers of multimedia learning (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and
qualitative research (4th ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research.
In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.,
pp. 119). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Dimitriadis, G., & Kamberelis, g. (2006). Theory for education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Dunn, J. (2012). 100 ways to use Twitter in education, by degree of difficulty. Retrieved from http://
edudemic.com/2012/04/100-ways-to-use-twitter-in-education-by-degree-of-difficulty/.
Feire, P. (1997). Pedagogy of the heart. New York, NY: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. Bergman Ramos, Trans.). New York, NY: Herder &
Herder.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York, NY: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1996). Letters to Christina: Reflections on my life and work. London, England: Routledge.
Freire, P. (1997). A response. In P. Freire, J. W. Fraser, D. Macedo, T. McKinnon, & W. T. Stokes (Eds.),
Mentoring the mentor: A critical dialogue with Paulo Freire (pp. 303329). New York, NY: Peter
Lang.
Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy and civic courage. Lanham, MD: Rowman &
Littlefield.
Freire, P. (2004a). A pedagogy of hope. New York, NY: Continuum.
Freire, P. (2004b). Pedagogy of indignation. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.
Gabriel, M., Campbell, B., Wiebe, S., MacDonald, R. J., & McAuley, A. (2012). The role of digital
technologies in learning: Expectations of first year university students. Canadian Journal of
Learning & Technology, 38(1), 118.
Gabriel, M., & Kaufield, K. (2008). Reciprocal mentorship: An effective support for online instructors.
Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(3), 311327.

123
184 J. P. Preston et al.

Gantz, J., & Reinsel, D. (2011). Extracting value from chaos. Framingham, MA: IDC Information.
Retrieved from http://www.emc.com/collateral/analyst-reports/idc-extracting-value-from-chaos-ar.
pdf.
Jackson, M. (2008). Distracted: The erosion of attention and the coming Dark Age. New York: NY:
Prometheus Books.
Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Haywood, K. (2011). The NMC Horizon Report: 2011 K12 Edition. Austin,
TX: The New Media Consortium.
Jukes, I., McCain, T., & Crockett, L. (2010/2011). Education and the role of the educator in the future.
Phi Delta Kappan, 92(4), 1521.
Kahn, R., & Kellner, D. (2007). Paulo Freire and Ivan Illich: Technology, politics and the reconstruction
of education. Policy Futures in Education, 5(4), 431448. doi:10.2304/pfie.2007.5.4.431.
Kuriloff, P. (2005). Breaking the barriers of time and space: More effective teaching using e-Pedagogy.
Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/104315/.
Lenhart, A., Ling, R., Campbell, S., & Purcell, K. (2010). Teens and mobile phones: Text messaging
explodes as teens embrace it as the centerpiece of their communication strategies with friends.
Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Levinson, M. (2010). From fear to Facebook: One schools journey. Washington, CD: International
Society for Technology. in Education.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (2013). The constructivist credo. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Marr, N., & Field, T. (2001). Bullycide: Death at playtime. Wantage, England: Wessex Press.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Min, K., & Siegel, C. (2011). Integration of Smart Board technology and effective teaching. Journal on
School Educational Technology, 7(1), 3847.
Montague Regional High School (20122013). Informational handbook. Retrieved from http://
montaguehigh.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/student-handbook-2012-13.pdf.
Nawaz, A., Khan, N., & Miankheil, A. (2011). Challenges of e-teaching: Contemporary paradigms and
barriers. Research Journal of Information Technology, 3(2), 99107.
Nielsen, L., & Webb, W. (2011). Teaching generation text: Using cell phones to enhance learning. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
November, A. (2010). Empowering students with technology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
OToole, M. (2011). Updated: TSBD to uplift cell phone ban. National Post. Retrieved from http://news.
nationalpost.com/2011/05/19/tdsb-to-lift-cell-phone-ban/.
Ohler, J. (2009). Orchestrating the media collage. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 813.
Peim, N. (2001). The history of the present: Towards a contemporary phenomenology of the school.
History of Education, 30(2), 177190.
Pennington, R. G. (2010). Computer-assisted instruction for teaching academic skills to students with
autism spectrum disorders: A review of the literature. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental
Disabilities, 25(4), 239248. doi:10.1177/1088357610378291.
Ploog, B. O., Scharf, A., & DeShawn, N. (2013). Use of computer-assisted technology (CAT) to enhance
social, communicative, and language development in children with Autism Spectrum disorders.
Journal of Autism and Development Disorders, 43(2), 301322.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 16.
Prensky, M. (2012). Partnering: A pedagogy for the new educational landscape. In L. Schrum (Ed.),
Educational technology for school leaders (pp. 323). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Preston, J. P., Moffatt, L., Wiebe, S., McAuley, S., Campbell, B., & Gabriel, M. (2015). The use of
technology in Prince Edward Island (Canada) high schools: Perceptions of educational leaders.
Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43(3). (in press).
Rideout, V., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M: Media in the lives of 818 year olds.
Menlo Park, CA: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved from http://
kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/8010.pdf.
Saine, P. (2012). iPods, iPads, and the SMARTboard: Transforming literacy instruction and student
learning. New England Reading Association Journal, 47(2), 7479.
Schmid, E. C. (2008). Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English
language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education,
51(4), 15531568.

123
Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools 185

Shah, N. (2011). Special education pupils find learning tool in iPad applications. Education Week, 5(1),
12.
Shaltry, C., Henriksen, D., Wu, M. L., & Dickson, W. P. (2013). Teaching pre-service teachers to
integrate technology: Situated learning with online portfolios, classroom websites, and Facebook.
TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 57(3), 2025.
Shariff, S. (2008). Cyber-bullying: Issues and solutions for school, the classroom and the home. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Small, G., & Vorgan, G. (2008). iBrain: Surviving the technological alteration of the modern mind. New
York, NY: Harper.
Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A
critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 21(2), 91101.
Sprenger, M. (2009). Focusing on the digital brain. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 3439.
Tatar, D., & Robinson, M. (2003). Use of the digital camera to increase student interests and learning in
high school biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(2), 8995.
Winzenried, A., Dalgarno, B., & Tinkler, J. (2010). The interactive whiteboard: A transitional technology
supporting diverse teaching practices. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4),
534552.
Wolf, M., & Barzillai, M. (2009). The importance of deep reading. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 3237.
Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York, NY: The Guildford Press.

123