Power of Technology:
Conference for the Council for Exceptional Children
April, 2001
Kansas City, Missouri
Laila Richmond, University of Kansas
Sean Smith, University of Kansas
Steve Smith, University of Kansas
Statement of Problem
Despite the tremendous growth in classroom computers, a number of investigations into computer use in K-12 classrooms have concluded that computer-based technologies are not being fully exploited by the majority of teachers. While the limited use of computers in K-12 classrooms cannot be attributed solely to preservice teacher education, school, colleges, and departments of education are considered to be lagging behind in meeting the needs of new teachers to develop technological competencies (Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), 1995; Hunt & Bohlin, 1995; Walters, 1992). Critiques of teacher education's performance in training new teachers generally focus on three areas. First, teacher educators do not sufficiently model appropriate use of computers for instructional purposes, either in courses or field experiences. Second, these programs do not, typically, incorporate technology across the curriculum. Third, the instruction that is provided to preservice teachers tends to focus more on the older and simpler instructional applications of computer technology (i.e., word processing) and less on exposure to and practice with newer, more sophisticated tools (i.e., integrated media).
Teacher preparation has emerged as a critical factor in the effective use of new technologies in education. Federal, state, and local agencies are investing billions of dollars to equip schools with modern computers and telecommunication networks. But these information technology investments will not pay off, unless future teachers become technology-proficient educators who know how to use these new learning tools to improve learning.
In recognition of the urgent need for technology-proficient educators, the U.S. Department of Education, with the support of Congress, has begun a new initiative to prepare tomorrow's teachers to use technology for improved teaching and learning. In its first year the Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) program awarded $75 million to 225 grantees in every region of the country. In June of 2000, about 95 institutions received grants to further the integration of technology across teacher education.
A goal of one of the PT3 projects, the Learning Generation Project at the University of Kansas, is to empower teacher education students to extend best practices in integrating instructional technology in their teaching by providing them with the necessary tools, skills and technical support. One way the Project seeks to accomplish this goal is through the creation of Technology Innovation Cohorts. A purpose of each Cohort is to design, implement, and assess an “innovation” that is intended to integrate the use of technology into the teacher education program. Each Cohort typically consists of a teacher education faculty, a faculty member from the arts and sciences, a K-12 teacher and student, and two teacher-education majors, and is supported by a group of technology experts. This composition of the cohorts is designed to ensure that the responsibility for integrating the use of the technology into the curriculum is shared by all those most intimately involved in or affected by the teacher education program. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the use of cohorts and the lessons learned from them.
Literature
Review
The call for teacher educators to integrate technology into preservice teacher education is not new. In 1986, Blackhurst and MacArthur found that teacher education faculty who were preparing teachers for the K-12 environment lacked the skills and knowledge to teach their students about technology. Similarly, over the past decade, researchers have argued that preservice technology training must become a priority if we are to have teachers who are comfortable and competent with respect to the use of technology in their teaching (Hasselbring, 1989; Langone, Malone, Stecker, & Greene, 1998; Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), 1995; Sheingold & Hadley, 1993; Wetzel, 1993).
Despite access enhancement and the advancements in technology, surprisingly, today’s teachers are not entering the classroom well prepared to use technology. Over the past decade, reports have indicated that despite the importance of technology in teacher education and its growing access, it is not central to the teacher preparation experience in most colleges of education in the United States today (Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), 1995; Milken Report, 1999). Reports describe basic deficiencies in the implementations of technologies in teacher preparation programs. Typically, faculty members fail to model appropriate use of computers, do not
incorporate the use of technology across the curriculum, and often focus on low-end applications (e.g., drill and practice, word processing) while ignoring more sophisticated tools that can integrate realistic problem-solving activities into teacher training programs (Abdal-Haqq, 1995; OTA, 1995). Research indicates that technology is not central to the teacher preparation experience. Instead, if technology is introduced the focus appears to center on the “how to” components of technology rather than, teaching with technology across the curriculum. Clearly, if preservice students ultimately are to integrate technology in the K-12 environment, they must see the technology (assistive and instructional) modeled by their instructor rather than simply informed of its potential benefits (Barker, Helm, & Taylor, 1995; Bryant, Erin, Lock, Allan, & Resta, 1998; Good, 1996; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), 1997; Smith, Houston, & Robin, 1995).
Recently, national and state teacher education accreditation agencies have taken notice of the need to enhance the integration of technology across teacher preparation. With the ability to influence change through the accreditation process, organizations like the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) (http://www.ncate.org) have instituted programs
to discuss technologies role in teacher preparation. For instance, NCATE’s Task Force on Technology and Teacher Education assembled in 1997 provides leadership to support initiatives to meet the technology challenge facing teacher education institutions. The Task Force's Report (http://www.ncate.org/projects/tech/TECH.HTM) encourages further integration of technology across teacher education programs through faculty modeling and use of newer, more sophisticated technology applications. This report extends NCATE’s 1994 adoption of technology guidelines created by the International Society for Teacher Education (ISTE) that call for the infusion of fundamental knowledge and skills for the use of computer technology foundations (http://www.ists.org).
Similar to national efforts, state Departments of Education have also sought to require the technology preparation of teachers (North Carolina, Florida, Virginia). As mentioned earlier, a recent initiative by the federal government has also sought to enhance the integration of technology across teacher preparation program. In 1999, the United States Department of Education launched the Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) program. PT3 (http://www.pt3.org) seeks to support innovative teacher preparation program improvements developed by consortia composed of higher education institutions, state agencies, school districts, nonprofit organizations, and others who are joining forces to develop well-prepared, technology-proficient educators.
In its initial year of funding, PT3 provided 75 million dollars to colleges and universities across the country through Capacity, Implementation and Catalyst Grant Programs. The Capacity grants seek to address initial groundwork for a teacher education program, the Implementation Program support full-scale program improvements in the preparation of technology proficient teachers
and Catalyst awardees focuses on national, regional, or statewide consortia that stimulate improvements in the development of technology proficient educators. The University of Kansas received a PT3 grant, which funds the Learning Generation (Learn Gen) project described here.
Learn Gen's Collaborative
Model
Learn Gen is designed to increase the quantity and quality of technology use in the University of Kansas Teacher Education Program. The project is based in the belief that preservice students need models of technology integration in their preparation program to help them better achieve technology integration in their practice. To create conditions that encourage the creation of effective technology
integration strategies and the development of technology rich products, Learn Gen supports the creation of cohorts or collaboration teams. Two types of collaborative efforts initially were built into the Learn Gen project, and a third one was added based on the experiences of the project's first year. (Refer to http://learngen.org)
School- University Partnership: The school districts that are participating in the project either have demonstrated a commitment to the use of communication and information technologies and have long standing partnership relationships with teacher preparation programs or have become a member of the University of Kansas Professional Development School Alliance. Representatives from each of the six districts serve on an advisory board. The advisory board serves several purposes. First, the board offers project personnel a means to keep the districts informed about the status of the project. Second, the board is to provide input to the project about each district's technology needs, as well as how each district uses technology at the classroom and school levels. Third, the school district members are able to advise project personnel of teachers that are capable of serving on an Innovation Cohort. Finally, the board
offers a means to ensure those teacher education students that serve on the Innovation Cohorts with a placement that enables them to apply the use of technology in a classroom setting.
Technology Innovation Cohorts: The Innovation Cohorts are primarily responsible for adopting
and/or generating innovations across three general themes: Integrating Technology across Curricula, New Visions of Teaching and Learning, and New Visions for Teacher Education. (Refer to Appendix A for abstracts of the cohorts' work.) Initially, each Cohort Team was to include at least one of each of the following: a preservice student, a faculty member from the School of Education, a practicing K-12 teacher, a K-12 "Generation Why" student, and a faculty member from the College of Liberal Arts programs. Based on the first round of Cohorts, each Cohort needs to include at least a teacher education faculty, a teacher education student, and a K-12 educator, where appropriate. This mix of professional personnel and stakeholders is critical to the process of developing and adopting innovation that leads to
systemic reform. Supporting the Cohorts is the Technology Infusion Group (TIG), which provides Cohorts with technical skills and integration strategies and orientation for successful collaboration. The responsibility and ownership for innovation though resides with the Cohorts themselves.
One of the ways Learning Generation seeks to extend the cohorts' innovations is through the development of an object-oriented model for reusing the learning objects that they create. The goal is to develop an open architecture for online learning that will allow learning to center on the needs and interests of the learner, enable learning to occur any time, any place, and allow for greater customizability and flexibility of the learning environment. A learning object approach will protect and compensate the work of educational content developers and thereby improve the quality and quantity of online learning content and services.
A learning object approach will allow for the elements of a cohort's work to become reusable resources for everyone in the learning community. For example, if a cohort constructs a science-based environmental data collection and analysis tool, the tool might be useful to other cohorts. Specifically, the cohort may create an Authorware Attain object that served as a micro-lesson used for teaching basic statistical analysis. A second cohort may wish to produce an innovation focusing on immigration patterns immediately following the Civil War. The statistics object from the environmental innovation could be added into the immigration innovation thereby increasing the power of the immigration model. Other cohorts might develop a unit that uses digital video to illustrate a teacher/student "conflict resolution" intervention strategy. The digital video from this intervention might be used in other products that illustrate and compare teaching strategies.
Sustainability Cohorts: Initially the Learn Gen project operated solely on a "bottom-up" approach. We quickly learned that, while such an approach addressed the needs of individual faculty and better ensured faculty ownership over their use of technology, difficulty arose once the faculty member either was no longer involved with the Learn Gen project or was undertaking work that exceeded the project's resources. As we moved through the first year of the project, the following issues regarding the continued use of instructional technology arose:
Ø Incorporation
of instructional technology into teacher education program as a distinct
discipline, as well as the integration of it into the curriculum at large.
Ø Development
of long range professional development plan that seeks not only to update
faculty, but to introduce them to emerging technologies and their application
and to provide time and support to develop the necessary skills and materials.
Ø Formation
and maintenance of support system that provides faculty with the technical
assistance necessary to further their ability to use instructional technology.
Ø Creation
and updating of an electronic portfolio system for all teacher education
students, with the system designed to serve multiple purposes as students
progress through the program and eventually seek employment.
Ø Design a means to recognize and showcase exemplary work of students and faculty.
Ø Design,
support and implement an ongoing program-wide research agenda that serves to
validate the use of instructional technology in teacher education and to
support individual faculty agendas.
Ø Create
a tracking and assessment system that enables students and faculty to determine
their level of expertise within and across courses. This system should complement the portfolio and enable faculty to
realize, for example, the ability level of students prior to entering a course.
A decision was made to form cohorts whose purpose was to sustain the work of the faculty beyond the life of the grant project. As now conceived, the cohorts will take on two forms. First, the Learn Gen project will work with the SOE's Teacher Education Division to form one or more cohorts devoted to technology-related curricular issues. The Catalyst project, for example, already is investigating the use of video-conferencing in one of the SOE's Professional Development Schools. A cohort might explore the feasibility of creating "virtual field experiences" through the use of video conferencing for teacher education students in the beginning of their program of study. Second, the Learn Gen project will work with the SOE's Technology Committee to explore what type of support system is necessary to continue the faculty's burgeoning use of technology. For example, since part of the Learn Gen model is to develop the technology skills of a cadre of teacher education students that are capable to providing faculty with technical assistance, the project is seeking to continue this model after the grant expires.
Developing a Technology
Innovation Cohort
Each cohort is required to develop a plan for investigating an area of interest and ways for infusing the teaching of the area with technology. Developing a cohort is a six-stage process. The stages are:
Genesis > Consultation > Plan >
Acceptance > Execution/Production > Assessment
Genesis: As a journey of a thousand kilometers begins with a single step, the beginning of a great cohort is an idea. Often these ideas come from students or practicing teachers who look to a faculty member in the KU School of Education.
Consultation: With an idea or problem to be investigated, the faculty member meets with an instructional technology specialist, who serves as the project's faculty liaison. This meeting is to discuss an idea or to help explore a number of ideas in the faculty member’s field of study.
Plan: After consultation the faculty member creates a written plan that proposes how to address the ideas. This may be done with assistance from students or others who may eventually become a part of the cohort. (For a sample plan, refer to Appendix B.) The general outline for such a plan is:
Title
Brief Abstract: One paragraph suitable for the website
expressing cohort vision, purpose, plans.
Purpose/Vision/Need: Two-Three
paragraph expression of the reason this cohort should be formed, what the area
of interest is why it is important, and an expression of the general nature of
the issue to be addressed.
Members: Name members
of the cohort who have already begun work, or identify the "types" of
people who will be recruited for the cohort and their roles.
Scope of Work: Explain the types of activities, meetings,
etc. that the cohort will engage in.
Deliverables: Listing of
the products that the cohort commits to creating for sharing. These will vary
in size, complexity and nature. We strongly encourage the production of a white
paper as the first product of all cohorts. The white paper should express the
sense of the issue that has been selected.
Please
see appendix C for other examples of possible products.
Timeline: Explicit
start and end date. Create benchmarks or milestones toward the completion of
the plan and the deliverables that will be 'due' on those dates. Include
approximate dates for important meetings including progress review meetings
with the faculty liaison.
Resources: This section should provide a list and justification
for resources that the cohort would need to achieve its goals. It is necessary
to indicate which resources LearnGen would be asked to provide and where others
could be leveraged from other sources.
Institutionalization/Extension: A
discussion of how the cohorts work and products would continue to make an
impact on our Teacher Education program past the actual life of the cohort.
Explain how the School of Education might adopt an initiative or how the
initiative could be continued with no support from LearnGen.
Evaluation: Explain how
the cohort's products, project, and processes would be evaluated. It is
important for cohorts to examine not only what they do, but also how they do
it.
Acceptance: The plan is submitted to Dr. Steven Smith the official faculty liaison who submits the plan to the cohort review committee. This committee reviews plans, accepts them; negotiate deliverables, time lines, deliverables, and Learn Gen support. Upon acceptance of a plan Learn Gen then creates a cohort support package.
Execution/Production: Cohort members meet and work according to their plan, with the resources identified, according to the timeline to produce the deliverables. As each product is completed a copy of it is provided to Learn Gen for archival purposes and for sharing on the Learning Generation web site.
Assessment: Each cohort should assess its work according to the plan that they create. This assessment is shared with the Cohort review committee and helps future cohorts with their development and planning.
Lessons Learned
1. Faculty ownership is critical: given the experiences of the first year, and supported by (relevant research in curricular change and teaming), those cohorts that were formed around an idea generated by the teacher education faculty member were more successful than those that sought to use the entire cohort to generate the idea. This is not to suggest that the other members were peripheral, but rather that the innovation was directed both toward the teacher education faculty member and a portion of their responsibility in the teacher education program. Also, the limited life span of the cohorts seemed to reflect the amount of time that a teacher education student is capable of remaining a viable member of the cohort.
2. Vehicle for future collaborative efforts: future collaborative activity emerged from the
partnerships that formed within and across cohorts during the life span of the first generation of cohorts. A special education and a social studies education faculty member, for example, now are working with an instructional technology faculty member of jointly reviewing assignments in each other's courses.
3. Continued innovation depends upon a viable curricular and support system: the School needs to consider how best to form an environment that serves not only to encourage, but to support, continued innovation. While seemingly obvious, the creation of such an environment raises questions critical not only to further innovation in, but also use of, instructional technology.
A. Once an innovation is in place, who is responsible for the maintenance and upgrade of it. While the innovations, for example, often are presented in the form of instructional material, they require both time and resources not typically associated with non-technology instructional resources.
B. How will the School of Education seek to build upon an individual faculty member's innovation by exploring its application within other areas of the teacher education program? For example, if the School invests resources, such as new versions of an application program and the staff time, to upgrade the material, the School then needs to work with a faculty member to make the adaptations necessary to modify the instructional material for another course.
C. While the development of a support system is an obvious response to Question B, this begs the next question - what constitutes a viable support system? The School of Education needs not only to provide the necessary technical support, but the incentives to encourage faculty members to build upon the work of their peers. This suggests a two-tiered system. The first tier aligns with Learn Gen's use of Technology Innovation
Cohorts. The second tier consists of several teacher education faculty members and teacher education students, who work either to extend the efforts of the Cohorts or to engage faculty in modifying existing innovations.
D. What incentives is a School of Education willing to provide faculty to integrate technology into the program? As indicated by…, while collaboration is an effective means to generate change, it is time consuming. Faculty not only need a viable support system, but the incentives necessary to devote the additional energy to their teaching without sacrificing their scholarly and service responsibilities. A possible solution is for the School to create a evaluation plan for the teacher education program that serves to satisfy the research agendas of faculty members relative to their use of instructional technology.
The strength of the Project rests in the inclusive and collaborative nature of the PT3 Grantees, the support system provided to them, and the design, testing, and reporting of the institution’s technology innovation efforts. The success of this approach is leading to several suggestions about how to approach the integration of technology into a teacher education program. First, the integration of technology best arises from the needs and interests of those involved in the program. Second, a collaborative effort that draws upon the perspectives of all those involved is essential. Third, such efforts need to tie the teacher education majors to the K-12 classrooms. Fourth, the integration is most likely to occur if the support system for such innovation already is in place.
Appendix
A
Teacher
Education Innovation Cohort Abstracts
Music Cohort - Jim Daugherty
As part of an ongoing initiative for the enhancement of choral music online, the vision of this cohort would be to establish a method whereby choral directors can implement effective online instruction into their classrooms. A second goal of the cohort is to provide continuing education for choral directors throughout the state of Kansas. Choral directors would be able to view clips of choirs and directors pinpointing the importance of gesture to the related sound. Further, directors would be able to video their own conducting and post clips to the site to seek tips from colleagues on how to work on their technique.)
Science/Math
Cohort - Jim Ellis
The Science/Math Cohort proposes to
develop a curriculum and plan of action for integrating appropriate
applications of advanced technologies into the KU teacher education program for
teachers of science and mathematics.
The cohort plans to produce a two modules on appropriate applications of
advanced technology in science and mathematics teaching; one for use in the
media and microcomputers course and another for use in the methods courses for
science and mathematics. The cohort
will also produce a framework for usage of appropriate applications of advanced
technology in undergraduate science and mathematics courses.
Special Education - Steve Colson
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) mandates that school interdisciplinary teams conduct a comprehensive evaluation of a student’s present level of performance across developmental domains for an initial evaluation, to monitor the student’s progress on his Individual Education Program (IEP) goals and objectives, and during an re-evaluation at least once every three years. Educators and related service professionals have typically used a variety of assessment tools during these evaluations including norm-referenced testing, criterion-referenced testing, student work samples, classroom observation data, teacher interviews and rating scales, parent interviews and rating scales, student interviews and rating scales (if appropriate), and any information from sources outside of the school (physician, mental health professionals, therapists, etc.). New technology gives these teams ways to manage this often cumbersome amount of information and allows for new ways to demonstrate student growth over time. This project will explore ways to create a portfolio of all of these kinds of data which can be put onto a CD-ROM for easy storage, viewing, updating, and sharing with all members of the team, including the parents and the student. The cohort for this proposal will develop these ideas, design a sample digital portfolio, and create a tutorial for teachers to develop digital portfolios for their students with special needs, both in the general education classroom and in experiences away from that setting. The professor involved in this cohort will also use these products teaching SPED 785: Application of Assessment Information for Students with Special Needs, a required course for all students in the masters program in Special Education.
Social Studies - Steven White
The purpose of this technology cohort is to collect and/or design materials for classroom instruction to be used in T&L 346 Teaching Social Studies in the Elementary and Middle Schools. These materials will then be burned into a CD that will be distributed to the class members. Materials will include, but not be limited to: course syllabus, state social studies standards, readings from journals in the field, lesson plans, activities, and Internet resources. There is a desire to eventually include short video clips of classroom instruction modeling selected instructional strategies.
Economics - Barbara Phipps
The purpose of the Online Economic Lessons cohort is to create and compile, for use by high school teachers, online economics lessons that specifically address the Kansas Standards & Assessments in Economics. The lessons would b easily accessible by Kansas teachers through a website that would also include a feedback mechanism, economic concept online dictionary, and annotated resources. In addition, the cohort would identify key agencies and resource partners and link them to the website for statewide visibility and access.
Foreign language Cohort
The purpose of this cohort is to facilitate access to authentic oral Spanish language to students of Spanish via the Internet. Because the Spanish language is used in many geographical areas, with many dialectal varieties, we plan to create a bank of Spanish oral samples, showcasing the different accents and varied vocabulary and expressions found in each of the Spanish-speaking countries. We would also like to try to facilitate contact between real Spanish speakers and students via audio-mail, so learners have opportunities to actually hear and speak to real speakers of those varieties. This cohort will bring together a foreign language teacher trainer, a pre-service Spanish teacher, a language college coordinator and Spanish professor. In addition, we will locate a local Spanish teacher and a school student.
Our area of interest is the availability of real oral Spanish language to students of Spanish with few opportunities to travel and/or to have access to oral manifestations of the Hispanic culture. Traditionally, oral language is presented to classroom students in the form of audio and videotapes, in addition to the oral skills of the language teacher. Because the Spanish language is so rich in dialects, students in the classroom are usually exposed to a very limited array of these varieties.
We plan to construct a website with two distinct parts:
1) A bank of oral samples from different Spanish-speaking countries (Spain, Mexico, Chile, Argentina,…) showcasing the different accents, as well as particular vocabulary and expressions (for example, Spaniards say “coche” for ‘car,’ whereas Mexicans say “carro.”
2) Native speakers of Spanish around the Hispanic world would be contacted (via educational institutions) and asked to volunteer to be “oral pen-pals.” The messages sent between these individuals and the users of our website will be audio-messages, that is, short oral recordings will be made and sent back and forth as audio-files. That way, users will not only have an opportunity to hear actual speakers of Spanish, from every variety, but they also will be able to practice their own oral abilities for real communication.
Appendix
B
Representative
Cohort Plan
1. Brief Abstract
This purpose of this technology cohort is to design and develop online supplemental instructional modules that provide a multimedia-rich learning experience similar to that available in a face-to-face or hands-on teaching environment. These modules would cover basic technology deficiencies of students entering the SOE teacher preparation program and be available initially to students enrolled in within TL 400 – Media and Microcomputers in the Classroom. Theses online modules would eventually be available to all courses and students within the SOE.
2. The cohort’s purpose: It is essential that each new teacher be given the opportunity to learn about technology and acquire the necessary skills to effectively use technology to enhance the educational experience of their students. Basic technology skills are not currently addressed in any consistent manner within pre-college institutions or at the University of Kansas.
The result is that students enter into coursework at the university level with a wide variety of technology experience and skills. The development of supplemental instructional modules could help to meet the needs of this diverse population of students and increase the potential for student success within the program.
3. Members - Name members of the cohort who have already begun work, or identify the "types" of people who will be recruited for the cohort and their roles.
Dr. Steven Smith – SOE Faculty
Christopher Heatwole - SOE preservice student
Irene Ratzlaff – SOE preservice student
Michael Kravets – Technology Coordinator for the Basor-Linwood SD
Tyler Stransky – K-12 “Generation Why” Student.
4. Process and Scope of Work
During the initial stages of development (January 2000 through May 2000), the cohort will meet to discuss, evaluate and plan the modules. Drawing from the experience levels of its members, this cohort will pursue the completion of its vision. Once scope and sequence have been developed, cohort members will begin constructing the supplemental instructional modules.
5. Deliverables
The product(s) created by this cohort will be online supplemental instructional modules for use in teacher preparation programs that address the skill-based deficiencies present in SOE students enrolled in TL 400.
6. Timeline
Stage 1: January 2000 – May 2000
Examine the problem by gaining an understanding of the various levels of expertise present in the student population.
Stage 2: August 2000 – December 2000
Design online supplemental instructional modules that address the most pressing skill deficiencies present within the student population.
December 2000 - End of cohort involvement
Stage 3: January 2001– May 2001
Evaluate the effectiveness and educational value of the online modules
Stage 4: August 2001
implement the supplemental instructional modules within TL 400 – the introductory technology course offering at the University of Kansas.
Stage 5: August 2002
expand the distribution of the modules to include the SOE and post graduate students accessing online.
7. Resources
The following resources are requested at this time to complete this project:
1) Macromedia Authorware (CBI Software) – provided by Regents Center.
2) Macromedia Dreamweaver 4.0 – requested purchase from LearnGen resources.
1. Macromedia Fireworks 4.0 (Web graphics software) – requested purchase from LearnGen
8. Institutionalization/Extension
By providing supplemental instructional resources that would be available to all students and faculty, this cohort is serving the continuing needs of the SOE. All modules will continue to be evaluated over time and new modules will be added to the supplemental instructional framework. Support for the creation and modification of modules would come from TL 400 students & faculty.
9. Evaluation: Evaluation would be conducted at the beginning and end of each TL 400 course offering. The evaluation would be designed to measure the overall level of a student’s technology skill base as well as their individual understanding of the role of technology in education.
Appendix C
Examples of Learning Objects
Examples of Possible Items for Learning Objects Collection
A cohort might choose to undertake the development of a technology "product" or a "process" that the faculty member will use in his/her current classes. This might be a way for a faculty member who wants to better use/model technology in his/her classes to get some very directed assistance in the learning of technology and the development of teaching aides or materials. These would be sharable. One could imagine SOE faculty working with CLAS faculty to co-produce such learning objects for use in both faculty member's classes.
Integration activities that the cohort could assist the faculty member in creating that would change the way the students in the faculty member's classes are encouraged to use technology. This would include changes to syllabi, descriptions of assignments, lesson plans, and examples of student outcomes such as a web-based portfolio, a series of PowerPoint presentations, an ongoing on-line list of children's literature titles and reviews or an online poetry site.
Research based project that the faculty member would design to specifically attempt to learn about some aspect of the use of technology in teacher education. The research would be sharable, resulting in publication and/or conference presentations. Service projects which have the cohort creating a resource that is designed in cooperation with a K-12 teacher and intended to be used in the K-12 classroom. In the best of worlds this type of cohort would also produce research about the use of the resource. certain content areas. Moving up a notch the cohort could produce a site that would be targeted a providing information in a content area that schools want/need but that are not available on the web. Part of this process might include extensive web searches, creation of a sharable index of good sites in the area and then the production of a website that fills a content void.
Academic projects like the start up of an online journal or the taking over of an online index in a content area. The creation of an online textbook for use in teacher preparation programs, production of online modules for use in teacher preparation programs, or the production of specific learning objects of use to people wanting to create an online classes. All of these would be shareable and significant. A cohort might do work to create a position paper on how the KU teacher education program might be modified to bring it in closer alignment with emerging standards or needs. The following represents an example of what one cohort plans to contribute to the collection.
The purpose of this cohort is to facilitate access to authentic oral Spanish language to students of Spanish via the Internet. Because the Spanish language is used in many geographical areas, with many dialectal varieties, we plan to create a bank of Spanish oral samples, showcasing the different accents and varied vocabulary and expressions found in each of the Spanish-speaking countries. We would also like to try to facilitate contact between real Spanish speakers and students via audio-mail, so learners have opportunities to actually hear and speak to real speakers of those varieties.
This cohort will bring together a foreign language teacher trainer, a pre-service Spanish teacher, and a Spanish language college coordinator and Spanish professor. In addition, we will locate a local Spanish teacher and a school student. Our area of interest is the availability of real oral Spanish language to students of Spanish with few opportunities to travel and/or to have access to oral manifestations of the Hispanic culture. Traditionally, oral language is presented to classroom students in the form of audio and videotapes, in addition to the oral skills of the language teacher. Because the Spanish language is so rich in dialects, students in the classroom are usually exposed to a very limited array of these varieties. At the same time, opportunities to communicate orally with actual Spanish speakers are also limited.
We plan to construct a website with two distinct parts:
1) A bank of oral samples from different Spanish-speaking countries (Spain, Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Venezuela…) showcasing the different accents, as well as particular vocabulary and expressions (for example, Spaniards say “coche” for ‘car,’ whereas Mexicans say “carro.”
2) Native speakers of Spanish around the Hispanic world would be contacted (via educational institutions) and asked to volunteer to be “oral pen-pals.” The messages sent between these individuals and the users of our website will be audio-messages, that is, short oral recordings will be made and sent back and forth as audio-files. That way, users will not only have an opportunity to hear actual speakers of Spanish, from every variety, but they also will be able to practice their own oral abilities for real communication.