PICRAT Analysis of Technology-Integration Activities in U.S. K–12 Public Schools.
Saved in:
| Title: | PICRAT Analysis of Technology-Integration Activities in U.S. K–12 Public Schools. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Sung, Woonhee1 (AUTHOR) wsung@uttyler.edu, An, Heejung2 (AUTHOR), Thomas, Christopher L.1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Computers in the Schools. Jan-Mar2026, Vol. 43 Issue 1, p60-83. 24p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Educational technology, *Grade levels, *Academic support programs, *Compulsory education, *Teacher development |
| Geographic Terms: | United States |
| Abstract: | This study examined technology integration in K–12 public schools based on the PICRAT (Passive, Interactive, Creative, Replace, Amplify, Transformative) matrix classification. Seventy-six K–12 teachers voluntarily completed an online survey between December 2020 and February 2021 that asked about their (a) grade-level teaching (b) implementation frequency of various technology-integrated activities, and (c) support. Results showed that teachers' real-class implementation of technology-integrated activities and the PICRAT levels of integration differed significantly between K–6 vs. 7–12 grades. More frequent use of overall technology-integrated activities was found in grades 7–12 than in K–6. Further, an analysis based on the PICRAT matrix found higher frequencies for Passive and Replace levels and lower frequencies for Creative and Transformative use for all grades. Finally, teacher support significantly predicted overall technology-integration frequencies for both K–6 and 7–12 grades. With regard to prediction on each level of PICRAT classification, support in K–6 grades was significantly related to all levels of technology integration except for Passive. However, in 7–12 grade, support failed to predict the frequency of technology integration for all levels except Amplify. Future directions are discussed, including the role of professional development and the importance of technology-integration frameworks in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Computers in the Schools is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This study examined technology integration in K–12 public schools based on the PICRAT (Passive, Interactive, Creative, Replace, Amplify, Transformative) matrix classification. Seventy-six K–12 teachers voluntarily completed an online survey between December 2020 and February 2021 that asked about their (a) grade-level teaching (b) implementation frequency of various technology-integrated activities, and (c) support. Results showed that teachers' real-class implementation of technology-integrated activities and the PICRAT levels of integration differed significantly between K–6 vs. 7–12 grades. More frequent use of overall technology-integrated activities was found in grades 7–12 than in K–6. Further, an analysis based on the PICRAT matrix found higher frequencies for Passive and Replace levels and lower frequencies for Creative and Transformative use for all grades. Finally, teacher support significantly predicted overall technology-integration frequencies for both K–6 and 7–12 grades. With regard to prediction on each level of PICRAT classification, support in K–6 grades was significantly related to all levels of technology integration except for Passive. However, in 7–12 grade, support failed to predict the frequency of technology integration for all levels except Amplify. Future directions are discussed, including the role of professional development and the importance of technology-integration frameworks in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 07380569 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/07380569.2024.2338243 |
