Teacher Education Programs Meet the Digital Age: Challenges Faced and Lessons Learned - A Symposium for the AACTE Annual Meeting

Hilton New Orleans Riverside, Grand Salon 21, Street Level

January 25, 2003, 3:15-4:30 P.M.

Nada Mach, Ph.D.; Peter Desberg, Ph.D.; James Cantor, Ph.D., Diane Hembacher, Ph.D., Hedy Moscovici, Ph.D.

nmach@csudh.edu, pdesberg@earthlink.net, jcantor@research.csudh.edu, dhembacher@csudh.edu, hmoscovici@research.csudh.edu

California State University, Dominguez Hills

School of Education

1000 East Victoria Street

Carson, California 90747

Discussant: Phyllis Fernlund, Ph.D., Dean, School of Education, Sonoma State University

phyllis.fernlund@sonoma.edu

http://www.csudh.edu/soe/faculty/nmach/AACTE03.html

 

 

Introduction

Nada Mach

 

Technology has facilitated new ways of learning that influence the preparation of teachers. Unfortunately, the infusion of technology in the classroom has created as many problems for teacher education as it has solved. Several major problems need to be considered, including limitations in resources (funding, space, personnel for training), attitudes towards technology in the classroom, as well as the resistance to change in learning environments.

New and emerging technologies have created unlimited possibilities in reconfiguring our learning environments.  Seymour Papert states in his speech at the 11th Colin Cherry Memorial Lecture on Communication on June 2, 1998, that the “complexities and dynamic possibilities of the modern world” are not compatible with the “top-down, centralized” structure of our current school system, based upon a 19th century model. He states further that “…we live in a society in which a rapid and accelerating change in social life and the economy and the kind of work that people do is transforming the need for knowledge.”

He explains that the technology may either be used to maintain the status quo, or to transform the system. He describes his vision of school in his paper with Gaston Caperton, “Vision for Education: The Caperton-Papert Platform” addressed to the 91st Annual National Governors’ Association Meeting in St. Louis, Missouri in August, 1999, as “a place where students learn largely by working on projects that come from their own interests—their own visions of a place where they want to be, a thing they want to make or a subject they want to explore. The contribution of technology is that it makes possible projects that are both very difficult and very engaging.” 

Similarly, Linda Roehrig Knapp and Allen Glenn make the point that “Teacher professionals need to be prepared to work in schools that are designed as ‘communities of learning’ which actively involve children in realistic, project-based learning that includes seeking information resources from the local community and the global community” (Knapp & Glenn, 1996, 198). In describing the role of SCDEs in training prospective teachers, they stress the importance of “modeling appropriate technology use in restructured classrooms and curricula, and for prospective teachers to have frequent opportunities to practice using technologies as learning tools and also as teaching tools” (Knapp & Glenn, 202).

How then do we ensure that beginning teachers have and can utilize the appropriate technology skills to create communities of learning? As recently as January 1999, the U.S. Department of Education reported that "Teachers are being asked to learn new methods of teaching, while at the same time are facing even greater challenges of rapidly increasing technological changes and greater diversity in the classroom....  [Given such challenges] relatively few teachers (20%) report feeling well-prepared to integrate educational technology into classroom instruction." According to the joint Milken - ISTE report (1999) on the findings from their survey of Teacher-Education programs in the United States,

 

·      Instructional technology instruction should be integrated into other courses and SCDE activities rather than being limited to stand-alone courses.

·      Student teachers need more opportunities to apply instructional technology during field experiences, perhaps through mentoring via distance education if mentors are not available in the schools.

·      Faculty should be encouraged to model and integrate technology (NCATE, 1997; Willis & Mehlinger, 1996) through increased emphasis on faculty professional development, including incentives outside the traditional academic rewards system.

·      To provide models for change, researchers, professional societies and education agencies should identify, study and disseminate examples of effective technology integration that reflect the current needs in both k-12 and teacher education (pp. 23-4).

 

NCATE 2000 standards, developed by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), (http://www.iste.org/standards/ncate/basic.html), enforce a performance assessment model for accreditation of teacher education programs that calls for replacing stand-alone technology classes with programs that infuse technology throughout all of the credential-preparation coursework.

While most teacher education faculty would probably agree that beginning teachers should be skilled at word processing, use of databases, spreadsheets, the Internet, e-mail, and other tools of technology, we cannot expect faculty to simply add this to their palettes and devote the many hours necessary to learn and maintain up-to-date skills in the use of technology. The challenge is how to facilitate this learning and support teacher preparation faculty to be motivated and comfortable infusing technology into their methods courses.

In doing so, there is an added challenge: how do we change our faculty’s attitudes and approaches to the creative uses of technology so that they become models for their students?  Further, how do we ensure that implementation is taking place in methods classrooms and transferring to k-12 classrooms?  How do we know that faculty in our schools of education are providing their students with the tools to do the same in their own classes, thereby enabling their students to compete in the marketplace? And how can we be sure that teacher educators will devote more of their work lives to keeping current, knowledgeable about, and skilled in the use of technology?

Because of the nation-wide teacher shortage, particularly in the urban, inner-city areas, teacher education programs are confronting many other new challenges, and hopefully viewing them as opportunities to create new and more effective ways of bridging theory and practice, as well as to provide appropriate, alternative, “on-the-job” training for non-credentialed teachers. How do these new ways of infusing technology into the teacher education curriculum impact issues of diversity and easier access? How can we provide assurance of instructional quality with large groups of part-time faculty teaching courses? And how can Schools, Colleges and Departments of Education (SCDEs) respond to the competitive environment that may exist in their own institutions? It is important that SCDEs explore and discuss current research in these areas because the change will not occur by itself.

 

Training-of-Trainers Model

The co-directors of the California State University, Dominguez Hills (CSUDH) PT3 grant decided to adopt the “Training-of-Trainers” Model for technology infusion into methods courses.  This is a collaborative model based upon the literature on school change and reform (Goodlad, 1997), which clearly delineates that changes agreed upon and implemented by those involved in the "culture" of the school are those that are most meaningful and most successful.

 

As a catalyst to change in classroom practice, learning technology can help educators promote active and participatory student learning. But the key to success isn't in the computers, probeware, graphing calculators, or access to networks and the Internet. It is liberated educators, whose understanding and creative use of technology can help them to achieve undreamed-of levels of excellence for themselves and their students.  Lowell Milken, President and Co-founder, Milken Family Foundation, p. 5, Professional Competency Continuum: Professional Skills for the Digital Age Classroom, Dimension 3, Technology in American Schools: Seven Dimensions for Gauging Progress.

 

As part of an earlier PT3 capacity building grant, we began by putting all of our full-time faculty into subject matter groups to develop a course-by-standards matrix as we addressed the ISTE and the new state of California technology standards that recommended incorporating technology into methods courses rather than offering a stand-alone course. Within our PT3 Implementation grant, the paradigm the we have used to mentor methods faculty in the implementation of technology into the curriculum is the "training-of-trainers model," thus making it easier for teacher preparation faculty to infuse technology into their methods courses, and be made accountable in non-threatening ways. Cadres of faculty mentors have been created to act as change agents to work with other faculty to develop a common project among all methods courses in the same subject, pilot this in their courses, and in so-doing, produce training materials to be used by others teaching the course.

The first cadre of professors to participate in this model - who serve as an example of the faculty training and participation - were the social studies methods faculty. They have shared in the planning and implementation of the database project, thus ensuring their commitment to mentoring other social studies methods faculty.  One of them will be reporting on their experiences later in this session.

The science methods faculty formed the second cadre of professors to participate. They planned and implemented a spreadsheet project in their classes. One of them will be describing her trials and tribulations in this implementation and the later training of part-time faculty in using the resulting CD-ROM.

 

Technophobia Issues

Feelings of fear, discomfort or anxiety toward one or more forms of technology have been accepted as a description of technophobia, and can result in the complete avoidance of using technology. As it turns out, the greatest predictor of technophobia resides in the attitude of the person who introduces that technology (Bollentin, 1998). Rosen and Weil (1998) found that 45% of k-12 teacher are technophobic themselves. The goal, then, of SCDEs becomes that of reducing technophobia through infusing technology into everyday tasks, so that instructors and students alike may feel comfortable in adapting its use in instruction.

To that end, during the Capacity-building grant the directors brought in Dr. Larry Rosen to speak about technophobia, and all teacher education faculty were given Dr. Rosen's technophobia index as a gauge of their existing level of technophobia. Since this is a self-report measure, we relied on the faculty's willingness to reveal their own anxiety.  The results of this survey resulted in certain decisions that would reduce technophobia: training and equipment tended to be at the source of the faculty's anxiety. Through the grant, training sessions were provided, and smaller tutorial sessions continued. In addition, through the grant we were able to purchase portable equipment (laptops with airport hubs and cards, projectors, screens, digital video cameras). This ongoing effort is meant to make technology more easily accessible to all members of the department.

Partners in the grant included the following: the Los Angeles Unified School District, who provided lab space when none was available on campus; Apple Computers, who provided free online course training to faculty, technical assistance and face-to-face training sessions in selected software and Web resources; Inspiration, who provided us with site licenses to both Inspiration and Kidspiration; and Blackboard, who provided us with Web sources.

 

Data Collection and Results

With the help of an independent evaluator, periodic surveys have been distributed to both full- and part-time faculty. Data collected since the start of the “capacity building” grant indicate that the trainer-of-trainers model has resulted in increased motivation to incorporate technology in teaching, feelings of comfort with technology, and more willingness to collaborate with colleagues on technology-based projects.

The authors’ hypothesized that the project’s work with faculty would have a positive impact on preservice and in-service public school teachers’ integration of technology in their own classrooms. To explore this hypothesis, this semester the directors provided supervisors of interns and student teachers with an informational session on the ISTE NETS standards.  An exploratory survey was distributed to supervisors regarding technology being used and infused by their preservice and in-service supervisees, and completed surveys are in the process of being collected.  Survey results, as well as samples of survey instruments used for data collection, will be available at the end of the 2002-3 school year, and will be posted to the Web.

Although technically the PT3 grant is ending in June 2003, the U.S. Department of Education has stated that all grantees may apply for extensions of one more year if they have not used up all of their financial resources. We plan to be among those who receive extensions. The Teacher Education Department at California State University, Dominguez Hills is reorganizing its program to meet new performance standards, including technology. The state technology standards are aligned with the ISTE technology standards for teachers. The trainer-of-trainers model that we have been using for technology infusion has had a tremendous impact on our faculty, and, hopefully on their students.

For more information on the CSUDH PT3 Grant, please visit our Website at http://www.csudh.edu/soe/faculty/pt3/index.html.

 

 

 

 

 

Technology Aspects in Infusion

Peter Desberg

 

Lessons Learned

CSUDH received a PT3 grant to facilitate the migration of technology instruction from a stand-alone course to full infusion into preservice methods classes as mandated by the California Legislature. It was also a good idea. Previously, students took a course in a well-equipped lab with a technology-savvy instructor showing dazzling applications. Then, they took their methods classes, and in many cases, never saw technology applied again. The message that was sent was...real teaching methods have little use for technology.

Being told by the administration that they would all have to comply with the new State regulations was not much of a motivational boost for our methods faculty. As we approached our colleagues, we were presented with numerous obstacles. Some of the more popular ones were:

 

·      There was too much information to convey in the methods course without including an additional technology unit

·      There was not enough access to technology on campus and in the schools.

·      Instructor technophobia

·      Technology skill deficits

 

In beginning this odyssey, we learned many lessons. Below are a few of the more powerful ones:

 

·      Do not start with Applications - We began by teaching applications that the faculty said they were interested in learning. These applications included the BlackBoard system to place class information on the Web, Hyperstudio and WebQuests. This type of instruction turned out to be very abstract and had little transfer to what the faculty’s immediate needs were.

·      Do not use workshops - Bringing large groups of faculty together in a workshop setting rarely worked because we were unable to meet individual needs while trying to interest all of them simultaneously.

·      Start with newer/younger faculty - We discovered that senior faculty were much more settled into their instructional modes and a lot less disposed toward experimentation.

·      Use projects that faculty are already doing - Rather than introducing new projects for faculty to try, we found it much more effective to take existing curricular areas and adapt them as technology applications. It required much less work from busy faculty, and it provided a guarantee that the area chosen would be of interest to the faculty.

·      Extend those projects with features that could only by accomplished with technology - Once a project area was selected, we had to find a way to produce desired results that extended the project in a very desirable way...and could only be achieved through the use of technology.

·      Support faculty in their initial presentations in terms of hardware and software - We worked in collaboration with methods faculty at every step of the process so that they learned about using technology as part of the development process…but that did not mean that they felt ready to try it alone. We provided back-up support when they first tried out the projects in their classes. As it turned out, we functioned more as observers, but our presence seemed comforting prior to the initial implementation of the projects in class.

 

 

 

Technology features

The CD-ROM disks that resulted from this project were designed to serve as training and backup support for the faculty involved. They were also intended to serve as the basis for training new faculty and part-time faculty. We have now decided that it may serve an additional role by being made available directly to preservice students. Here are a few of the features of the Immigration, Pulse-Rate and the WebQuest CD-ROM disks:

 

·      Video interviews with project faculty presenting the rationales for the project - The faculty do an excellent job at explaining the rationale for the project in terms of state and national standards, pedagogical implications, value as a tool for teaching their subject matter and technology utility.

·      Classroom videos to show how to conduct the lessons - Faculty and students who are new to the project have the opportunity to observe how the lesson is conducted effectively by experienced faculty models.

·      Videos with student/group interactions - There is also an opportunity to view how student groups are organized and how they interact during the various stages of the project.

·      Step-by-step software instructions - There are no prerequisites for doing this activity. The CD-ROMs have step-by-step instructions for every task that must be done using the database and spreadsheet software.

·      Interactive training on software - The ClarisWorks database and spreadsheet were simulated on the CD-ROM disks using Macromedia Director. There is an opportunity to practice each part of the task and receive feedback before ever trying the actual software application itself.

·      Demo version of software with data files - There is a demo version of ClarisWorks on the CD-ROM disks that also contains a full set of data that may be manipulated. In addition, there are also templates for doing the exercises.

·      Videos of faculty reflection on project - At the end of the CD-ROM disks, there are videos of project faculty reflecting on each of their project, its mission and effectiveness.

·      Blank data forms that can be printed out - All forms necessary to use the lessons are included and may be printed out directly from the disks.

·      Links to related Web resources - The CD-ROM disks have a series of Websites related to the topics of immigration and heart rate. There are also several database and spreadsheet lesson plan Websites that may be accessed by simply clicking on URLs found on the disk. From there, the Director program will launch any Web browser found on a particular computer and go to the selected Website.

 

Technology Competencies Acquired

Students will acquire a number of technology skills from this lesson, including those that follow:

 

·      Database skills - There are a number of database skills that will be acquired including:

q      Creating fields;

q      Entering data;

q      Sorting data;

q      Searching (querying) records using individual and multiple search criteria;

q      Creating custom reports and layouts; and

q      Merging database files to create larger data pools.

 

·      Using data to ask and answer inferential questions - Students learn to function as historians. They determine what the questions they want to answer, what data needs to be collected to answer them and how to make inferences from their collected data.

·      Using technology in the one computer classroom - Only one computer is needed to complete this project. This facilitates each student’s view that he or she is part of a community of scholars. Each student helps determine the questions, collects data from an interview, enters his or her data into the class database and participates in the inferences drawn from the data analysis.

·      Spreadsheet Skills – There are a number of spreadsheet skills that will be acquired including:

q      Identifying key spreadsheet elements such as columns, rows, cells, formula, etc.;

q      Data collection techniques compatible with the use of a spreadsheet;

q      Entering labels, data and formulae; and

q      Performing specific statistical calculations, including mean, standard deviation and correlation.

 

·      WebQuest Skills – The WebQuest CD-ROM contains video interviews with Dr. Bernie Dodge, the developer of Webquests. IN addition, it has the following features:

q      A step-by-step guide to developing a WebQuest using Bernie Dodge’s site with explanations and guidance;

q      A parallel walk through of a WebQuest following the Dodge model with video interview of the developer discussing each issue; and

q      A series of links to additional information, resources and additional WebQuests.

·      Word-Processing Skills used to create a newsletter. There are several student examples and a more detailed example created for the project showing the integration of history, literature and writing skills.

 

 

Supporting Teachers Using Technology to Make History Come Alive

Jim Cantor

 

Despite the current trends imposing mandated, teacher-directed, scripted, skills-based curriculum (Hirsch, 1988), we still believe that student and adult learners need to engage in thoughtful, experiential learning activities designed to help them make meaningful connections to their prior knowledge (Good & Brophy, 1995).  Ours is a more demanding and thought-provoking approach, nevertheless we believe that by engaging learners with relevant content they become proactive and look for ways to gain and understand new knowledge.  During engagement, students want to learn, allowing skill development to occur effectively without resistance.  Rather than tell students what others have learned, we believe that learning is facilitated and guided in social contexts in which teaching for understanding is a shared responsibility of the community of student and adult learners (Vygotsky, 1978).  When learning activities integrate interdisciplinary approaches and multiple ways of knowing, critical and creative thinking develops and learners explore possibilities rather than recite facts (Gardner, 1993).

So, what does this mean for the teacher educator teaching social studies methods classes?  One of the first activities I do is to ask my students (who are non-credentialed, beginning teachers in hard-to-staff, urban public schools), to think about what they remember from when they were elementary students learning social studies.  I have them stand up and take their place in a line-up that is a continuum that runs from great memories where they were engaged in inspiring, educative experiences – down to negative memories where their social studies experiences in elementary school were meaningless.  In every class, only a few students have wonderful memories.  Some have negative memories, but most have no memories of learning social studies at all during their K-5 years.  The common experience was that they were told to read the chapter and answer the questions at the end.  Those with powerful memories recall participating in projects – making things – acting things out – going into their communities to research, draw, or attend or speak at meetings.

As teacher educators, we are searching for ways for students to BE historians, and DO history, rather than merely study history.  Real historians do not read digests of historical events and then answer the questions in the back of the chapter.  To do the work of real historians, children need rich environments filled with the “manipulatives” of history teaching – primary source documents, historical photographs, oral histories, and surveys.  Technology provides overwhelming opportunities for young historians to become “active discoverers,” rather than “passive recipients.”  Internet sources provide limitless resources for analyzing multiple viewpoints, so that students can draw their own conclusions and develop their own historical understandings.

In this project students go beyond simply collecting oral histories and they use a database to help them make sense of what they learned about their families’ “coming-to-America stories.”  They are able to devise predictions, make comparisons, and place what they learned into meaningful contexts.  From this they can write analytical historical narratives.  The teacher plays the role of facilitator, asking questions that help learners develop deeper understandings and clarify what they know.  Rather than focus on isolated facts, students use this database project to pose questions and use inquiry methods to explore historical concepts in the world around them.  In these ways, students are encouraged to hypothesize, draw logical inferences, gather relevant data, and develop their own historical understandings.

Linda Darling-Hammond’s research informs us that reforms that invest time in teacher learning and give teachers greater autonomy are our best hope for improving America's schools.  More attention to learning and cognition has accompanied a deepening appreciation for content pedagogy and constructivist teaching.   She urges teacher educators to develop a reflective, problem-solving orientation by engaging in teacher research, school-based inquiry, and inquiry into students’ experiences.  This approach is especially effective in low-income, urban schools where the multi-cultural, multilingual nature of the student body benefits from approaches that incorporate learning through multiple intelligences and project-based approaches to learning.  The aim is to view teaching as collegial work and as an intellectual activity.  Most teachers have never experienced this kind of teaching and learning.  Most of us sat at our desks, listened to the teacher, read the material, and those of us who were successful responded back with the “right answers.”  It is hard to expect teachers to be open to learning news ways of teaching or to be successful implementing methods that they have never experienced themselves.  Darling-Hammond states that investing time for teacher learning is essential if significant changes are to be expected (Darling-Hammond, 1996, 1997).  We have created this CD-ROM as a tool to bridge this gap and support teacher educators teach teachers to teach in new ways.

 

 

 

 

Our Experience Infusing Technology into Social Studies Methods Classes

Diane Hembacher

 

Elementary and middle school teachers today face the daunting task of incorporating a multitude of standards and skills from different subject areas into their daily teaching.  As teacher educators, we must provide our students with strategies for addressing standards and skills across subject areas.  At the same time, we must meet the new NCATE mandate of infusing technology throughout credential-preparation coursework.  How can we integrate technology into the methods class syllabus without displacing other essential topics, skills, and elements of effective instruction?  And how can we facilitate the transfer of technology from the preservice methods classroom to the elementary or middle school classroom?

In a review of studies that analyze the effects of media on learning, Diem (2000) reports that “if technology is to effectively impact the classroom it must be related to the overall intent of learning” (p. 493).  In this way, “technology becomes tied to both content and process skills as it is sublimated within broader learning goals”, and thereby “gives direction for a variety of activities”(p. 493-494) within the instructional system. If technology is infused in this way, it supports, rather than displaces, key elements of the curriculum.  Unfortunately, in the past, technology has not served this role in the typical social studies classroom.  Diem (2000) cites Berson (1996), who reports that “computers have served the primary function of facilitating students’ access to content and have been relegated to being an appendage to traditional classroom materials” (p. 494). 

The project for technology infusion that we have developed ties technology to the goals, content, and process of the methods class, as well as of the elementary or middle school classroom.  With this project, technology provides direction for activities that would not be feasible using traditional materials.

In planning the project, we sought to integrate computer database technology with California State Standards for History-Social Science, and historical thinking skills.  We selected the theme of immigration, as it is addressed in standards from grades two through five and eight, and also, because it provides an opportunity for students to “do” the work of historians, collecting data about immigration within their families and community.  The database would be used to record and analyze the data.

Using the database adds a new dimension to a standard oral history project.  First, students have the opportunity to formulate meaningful questions about variables pertaining to the theme of immigration, before conducting their interviews.  For example, is age of arrival related to severity of obstacles faced in the new country?  The variables that appear in the questions constitute the categories for the database, and are used in developing interview questions.  Once students conduct their interviews, they learn to input the data into the database.  Finally, the database promotes further inquiry about immigration, as students use the database to manipulate the data, search for patterns, and pose new questions.  Clearly, technology use in this project is closely tied to the goals, content, and activities of the social studies methods class, as well as the elementary or middle school classroom.

Our next challenge was to introduce the project to students in our methods classes, in a way that would facilitate transfer of the technology to the public school classroom.  Several studies have analyzed barriers to computer use, as well as factors that facilitate use of computer technology in the classroom.   A study of the perceptions of pre-service teachers revealed the following perceived obstacles to use of computer technology: (1) lack of access to computers (2) apprehension about appearing unskilled in front of students (3) fear of equipment failure (Keiper, Harwood, and Larson, 2000).  Factors that facilitate use of computers in the classroom include a feeling of self-efficacy (George and Camarata, 1996), a strong interest in using computer technology (Gibson and Hart, 1997), and modeling the use of computer technology in the pre-service classroom (Willis, 1997).  Keiper et al. concluded that while obstacles to computer use may be present in many situations, technology will be employed in the classroom when teachers perceive that the benefits of using technology outweigh the obstacles (2000).

In accordance with this literature, we decided to actively engage our students in the database project. We modeled the role of the teacher, facilitating the formulation of research questions, introducing the interview questionnaire and procedures, demonstrating how to input data into the computer and how to use the database technology to manipulate the data, and supporting students as they input their data and the analyzed it.  Students were encouraged to assist each other, and to seek assistance from peers, so that all could be successful in working with the database.  We modeled how to manage a classroom with just one computer, using a projector to demonstrate data manipulation before the whole class, and allowing students to work at the computer in pairs while the rest of the class was engaged in other activities. Students were active participants in each stage of the project, and seemed to enjoy taking on the role of historians and becoming a community of researchers.

Students in three methods classes were asked to write their comments, anonymously, about the various aspects of the database project.  Comments were overwhelmingly positive, but also revealed some of the limitations of the project, and provided suggestions for improvement.  Many students commented on the value of interviewing immigrants.  For example, one individual wrote, “The most valuable part was the stories that the woman whom I was interviewing told as she explained the meaning of the numerical response.”  Some students found the project to be stimulating because they were actively involved from the start.  One student wrote that formulating questions for analysis was a good way “to get us . . . interested in what we were going to analyze.  It made us guess what we thought the outcomes would be and then have to wait to find out.”  Students commented on the technological aspects of the project as well.  Many students wrote that the data entry process was very easy, with comments such as the following:  “Very easy to do and computer friendly for the non-computer literate person.”  Students also reflected on the value of the data manipulation process, noting that it allowed the class to “look at information in many different ways,” and that the process led to more questions.  However, a few students expressed concern about their ability to implement this stage of the project.  For instance, one student wrote, “The task was worthwhile, but the teacher would need to practice “sorting” and “organizing” prior to the lesson, or I could foresee disaster

              When asked if they consider using a computer database in their own classrooms, 56 out of 57 students said that they would.  Students wrote that they considered the activity worthwhile because it promoted task-based interaction, it integrated a variety of skills, it made students feel important, and it was a novel way to engage students in social studies learning.  However, some students included caveats with their responses to this question.  They commented that they would consider incorporating a database project if their schools provided the computer and software and if they were given guidance in fitting active learning strategies into the curriculum along with scripted programs such as Open Court.

Our next step will be to implement the project in the classroom of a fifth grade teacher who has been trained in the use of the database, so that we can determine whether our model for technology infusion can be successfully transferred to the public school classroom.  We plan to videotape the teacher and her students as they engage in the various stages of the project.  We hope that this experience will provide us with valuable feedback about ways to facilitate transfer of the technology to the public school classroom, and about obstacles that must be overcome.

 

Infusing Technology into the Science Methods Classes

Hedy Moscovici

 

Technologies and Inquiry Science

The National Science Education Standards (National Research Council – NRC, 1996) calls for science to enter the K-12 classrooms through the same process that it enters the research laboratory – through inquiry: “Inquiry into authentic questions generated from student experiences is the central strategy for teaching science” (p. 31). During their inquiries, students are encouraged to use technology in order to perform various tasks. They use technology to access scientific information needed for their research, plan and develop technological devices that will help them with their inquiries, use technology and databases in order to process and manipulate data, and use technology to communicate and compare results. A later addendum to the National Science Education Standards emphasizing examples of inquiry at the K-12 (NRC, 2000) clarifies the use and interdependence of technologies, mathematics, and science learning using inquiry:

A variety of technologies, such as hand tools, measuring instruments, and calculators, should be an integral component of scientific investigations. The use of computers for the collection, analysis, and display of data is also a part of this standard. Mathematics plays an essential role in all aspects of an inquiry. For example, measurement is used for posing questions, formulas are used for developing explanations, and charts and graphs are used for communicating results (p. 166).

As inquiry science involves the use of mathematics, we also need to look into the approach to technology recommended by the national mathematics standards. Use of technology is described as “essential” in the standards for teaching mathematics (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000, p. 11). The word “essential” has immediate implications for school mathematics and for pre-service and in-service mathematics teacher preparation. Teacher preparation programs need to prepare teachers to learn with rather than about technology and be able to transfer these skills into the K-12 environment.

Krajcic, Blumenfeld, Marx, and Soloway (2000) explore the various stages of scientific inquiries and underline the use of technologies as enhancing tools for inquiry science.  These technologies “expand the range of questions that can be investigated, the types of information that can be collected, the kinds of data representations that can be displayed, and the products that the students can create to demonstrate their understanding” (p. 293).

 

Role of Teacher Preparation Programs

In a report to the president, the President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (1997) stresses the important role of the SCDEs in the translation of the technological advancements into the K-12 classrooms, and the barriers that need to be overcome in order to do so. The report concentrates on three areas: provide funding for the acquisition of adequate hardware and software, design programs to educate and support faculty in technological advances, and provide time and opportunities for the education faculty to incorporate new technologies in both the content and methods courses. The report also recommends that all K-12 schools be connected to the Internet by the year 2000 in order to ensure access and usage equity.

In an attempt to determine the state of technology use in science teacher education, Pedersen and Yerrick (2000) conducted an investigation that involved 400 science teacher educators randomly selected using criteria of public/private and geographic region from the list of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. Out of the 305 surveys completed and returned, the authors selected 260 respondents representing the science education population that was still teaching at the college level. Results showed that there was a discrepancy between what technology the science education faculty wanted to use in their classes and what they were currently using. The sample did not identify lack of access as one of the constraints to enhance the technology dimension of their classes, but concentrated on the lack of faculty training, lack of time allocation for the integration of technology in the course material, and lack of science technology experts on campuses.

A study of two high schools with high availability of technology hardware and software in the Silicon Valley (Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Peck, 2001) uncovered an interesting paradox – despite the high availability, technology did not enter the secondary classroom. Each teacher in these two schools had one classroom computer and a large number of computers with Internet connections and software located in different media centers. Their results show that  “almost two thirds to three fourths of the teachers who taught academic subjects in both schools were nonusers of the media centers’ resources” (p. 820). The reason for their findings lies with teachers’ perceived lack of time to check and select software and to integrate these into their teaching. An interesting point that needs to be addressed is that the teachers that used technology changed their teaching from the mainly lecture, teacher-centered approach to the more student-centered and more project-oriented approach.

As a response to the increased need for technology use and experience, various teacher preparation programs employed various implementation plans. The Center for Excellence in Education at Northern Arizona University decided to develop a team-taught course focusing on technology infusion as part of their Integrated Secondary Teacher Education Program (Willis & Raines, 2001). Students in this course were required to produce artifacts in the area of multimedia presentations, Internet investigations, spreadsheets and desktop publishing. Using a different approach, Guy (2002) decided to infuse technology into an elementary science methods course and an earth science course. Students in his class had to create a Web page using WebQuest, employ concept mapping Inspiration to organize and reflect upon teaching experiences, and use digital cameras and PowerPoint to communicate science content through images and text. Our Teacher Education program at CSUDH decided to combine the two above-mentioned approaches. The result is a short course placed as a pre-requisite to ensure knowledge and ability to use the basic technological features (such as word processing) and infusion of various specific technological skills (such as spreadsheets) in pre-determined courses to ensure that the credentialed teacher graduating from our program is ready to use technology at the K-12 level with knowledge and confidence.           

 

Science Spreadsheet Development

Developing spreadsheets for science and mathematics learning is not a new adventure. Drier (2001) reported using spreadsheets in teacher training mathematics courses in order to “create dynamic experiential environments for discovering mathematical relationships” (p. 170). Her students were able to use spreadsheet formats and create mathematical problems, such as exploring projectile motion or experimenting with probability.

Collaborative efforts between the co-directors of the PT3 grant mentioned previously, science educators and pre-service teachers in a secondary methods course resulted in the development of a CD-ROM disk. This CD-ROM allows users to perform data manipulations ranging from simple ones such as finding the heart rate averages for individuals with and without exercise, to the more complex ones such as finding the correlation between the time that it takes to get to the normal pulse after exercise and the age of the individual. In addition, the CD-ROM might be used as a case study teaching tool as it shows how I changed the procedure for the exercise in order to enhance the quality of the data collected for the spreadsheet. As the CD-ROM includes demonstration video clips, it is easy for the user to structure the teaching and learning environment in order to ensure the clarity data collection step and the correctness/preciseness of the data collected. 

The choice of the subject–heart rate–was intentional as it fulfills numerous science standards for life sciences, as well as health science standards, and teachers are more inclined to use something that enhances students’ understanding on required science standards. The other reason for our choice is that the data collection does not require any sophisticated equipment pieces or materials that might not be easily available to our pre-service teacher population.

It is important to underline the fact that the Heart rate CD-ROM is not just a spreadsheet tool. In addition to teaching the user the meaning and use of the spreadsheet, it provides biological information on the meaning of heart rate and related concepts, a lesson plan that includes experimentation and investigation, video clips showing how to collect data, and Internet Web sites to read more about the various issues related to heart functioning and heart rate.

The development of the spreadsheet CD-ROM also took into consideration some of the concerns expressed by Volman and Van Eck (2001) in a review article on gender equity and information technology during the last decade. Their findings show that there is still less involvement of females and minority individuals in software development, and that females do not serve usually as role models for technology use in the schools. The heart rate CD-ROM provided a classroom climate that was gender-inclusive and encouraged participation from all the participants.   

 

Heart-Rate CD-ROM Use in Training Other Faculty

As an immediate response, the CD-ROM on Heart rate was used to train other faculty teaching science and mathematics methods courses for pre-service elementary teachers. One of the individuals who participated already used the CD-ROM in her elementary science methods course.

 

Heart-Rate CD-ROM Use in the Secondary Science Methods Class

As the CD-ROM was completed after the first month of spring semester, I encouraged only a small number of pre-service teachers (the ones teaching Biology, Health, or just discussing variables as part of the experimentation and investigation standard) to try it and check it with their students. As none had tried it yet, and all reported that they needed to learn and know more before using the CD-ROM in their classes, I realized that I needed to take another approach. My findings show that in order to transfer into the secondary science classroom, the CD-ROM needs to be used during the methods class to ensure knowledge and comfort on the part of the teachers. 

I plan to use the Heart rate CD-ROM in the fall 2002 Secondary Science Methods course as part of the instructional technology three-hour session that I always do at the beginning of the semester. This session also addresses the availability of Internet resources for science teachers, some of the existing CD-ROMs for science teachers, using tables, spreadsheets, and using Email with attachments for communication. If necessary, a second session will be scheduled in the computer lab to ensure mastery of the Heart rate CD-ROM components for the secondary science teachers interested in immediately transferring their knowledge in the secondary science classroom.

 

Looking Back

The development of the Heart rate CD-ROM was a wonderful learning opportunity and the existing product has a great potential as a teaching and learning tool. As mentioned previously, the CD-ROM not only provides a spreadsheet exercise, but also the content information, the lesson plan, additional Websites, and video clips showing what teachers should and should not do in order to collect reliable data.

For future technological developments and infusions I would like to see a commitment from the state in the form of time release for the faculty in order to learn and integrate technology in the most effective way in the content and methods courses (consistent with Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Craig, 2001; Pedersen & Yerrick, 2000). Such an approach, with an application follow-up during pre-service teachers’ fieldwork will ensure transfer of instructional technology into the K-12 classroom.

 

 

References

Berson, M. J. (1996).  Effectiveness of computer technology in the social studies: A review of the literature.  Journal of Research on Computing Education, 28, 486-499.

 

Bollentin, W. (1998). Byting back: Is technophobia keeping you off the internet? On the Internet Magazine. http:www.csudh.edu/psych/OTI.htm. 10 April 1998,.2.

 

Caperton, Gaston, & Seymour Papert (1999). Vision for education – The Caperton-Papert platform,” the 91st Annual National Governors’ Association Meeting, St. Louis, Missouri, http://www.mamamedia.com/areas/grownups/new/21_learning/home_alt.html?whicharticle=papert_caperton

 

Coughlin, E.C. & Lemke, C. (1999). Technology in American Schools: Seven Dimensions for Gauging Progress: Professional Competency Continuum, Dimension 3 - Professional Skills for the Digital Age Classroom. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology, Milken Family Foundation.

 

Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining and apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.

 

Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 12 -16.

 

Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The Right To Learn:  A Blueprint for Creating Schools That Work. San Francisco, CA.: Jossey-Bass

 

Diem, R. A. (2000).  Can it make a difference?  Technology and the social studies.  Theory and Research in Social Education, 28( 4), 493-501.

 

Drier, H. S. (2001). Teaching and learning mathematics with interactive spreadsheets. School Science and Mathematics, 101(4), 170-179.

 

Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences:  The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic Books.

 

George, G., and Camarata, M. R. (1996).  Managing instructor cyberanxiety: The role of self-efficacy in decreasing resistance to change.  Educational Technology, 136, 49-54.

 

Gibson, S. E. and Hart, S. (1997).  Project E.L.I.T.E.: A case study report of teachers’ perspectives on a social studies computer pilot project.  Canadian Social Studies, 31, 171-175.

 

Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1995). Contemporary Educational Psychology ( Fifth ed.). New York: Longman Publishers USA.

 

Goodlad, John I. (1997).  In Praise of Education. New York: Teachers College Press.

 

Guy, M. D. (2002). Technology tools to support teaching and learning.  Presentation at the annual international meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, Charlotte, NC, January 10-13.

 

Hirsch, E. D. (1988). Cultural Literacy. New York: Vintage Books.

 

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) & the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)(2000). Standards for Basic Endorsement in Educational Computing and Technology Literacy.http://www.iste.org/standards/ncate/basic.html.

 

Keiper, T., Harwood, A., and Larson, B.  (2000).  Preservice teachers’ perceptions of infusing computer technology into social studies instruction.  Theory and Research in Social Education, 28 (4), 566-579.

 

Knapp, L.R., & Glenn A. Restructuring Schools with Technology, Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1996.

 

Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., & Soloway, R. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell and E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring intoInquiry Learning and Teaching in Science (283-315). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

 

Lockard, J., Abrams, P. D., & Many, W. A. (1997). Microcomputers for the Twenty-first Century Educators. An imprint of Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. 377.

 

Moursand, D. & Bielefeldt, T. (1999).  Will New Teachers be Prepared to Teach in a Digital Age?  Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology, Milken Family Foundation.

 

National Center for Educational Statistics (1997).  Digest of Educational Statistics, 1997. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

 

National Council for Accreditation of teacher Education, Task Force on Technology and Teacher Education  (1997).  Technology and the New Professional Teacher: Preparing for the 21st Century Classroom. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

 

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

 

National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

 

National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

 

Papert, Seymour (1998). “Child power: Keys to the new learning of the digital century,” The 11th Colin Cherry Memorial Lecture on Communication, Imperial College, London http://www.ConnectedFamily.com/main_alt.html

 

Pedersen, J. E., & Yerrick, R. K. (2000). Technology in science teacher education: Survey on current uses and desired knowledge among science educators. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(2), 131-153.

 

President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology – Panel on Educational Technology. (1997, March). Report to the President on the Use of Technology to Strengthen K-12 Education in the United States. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President

 

Rosen, L. & Weil, M. (1998) Technostress: Coping With Technology @WORK @HOME @PLAY. http://www.technostress.com/.

 

Smith, Sean Joseph; O'Bannon, Blanche (1999). Faculty Members Infusing Technology across Teacher Education: A Mentorship Model. Teacher Education and Special Education; 22 (2), 123-35.

 

Volman, M., & Van Eck, E. (2001). Gender equity and information technology in education: The second decade. Review of Educational Research, 71(4), 613-634.

 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

 

Willis, E. M. (1997).  Technology: integrated into, not added onto the curriculum experiences in preservice teacher education.  Computers in the Schools, 13, 141-153.

 

Willis, E.M.  & Mehlinger, H.D. (1996).  Information technology and teacher education. In J. Sikula, T.J. Buttery, & E. Guyton, Handbook of Research on Teacher Education. New York: Simon & Shuster MacMillian, pp. 978-1029.

 

Willis, E. M., & Raines, P. (2001, September). Technology in Secondary Teacher Education. http://www.thejournal.com.