Executive Summary
The meaningful integration of technology in teacher education varies tremendously in the College of Education at the University of Georgia. The purpose of this proposal is to identify and implement a systematic college-wide plan to integrate technology into teacher education. There are many reasons the college needs to act decisively now. First, technology affords all teachers with valuable and unique opportunities for learning and education. It is the right thing for us to do. Second, external forces will no longer allow us to remain isolated and unfocused on this issue. Two examples are NCATE and House Bill 1187. Third, our faculty and students are ready if they know leadership and support will be provided. Individual departments, however well intentioned, cannot be expected to make this happen. To be successful, this effort must be initiated college-wide in a systematic way. In short, the COE needs to be a leader in educational technology integration. The technology infrastructure exists in the State's schools to make a difference. The parents and politicians want it. Our children need and deserve it.
Three stages are proposed to take our teacher education students through a systematic process of learning how to integrate technology into classroom practice. Stage 1 (Familiarization) involves helping students to become familiar and confident with a wide range of different technologies. Stage 2 (Creative Application) involves helping students to apply technology creatively in their subject areas. Stage 3 (Partnerships) involves partnering our students with master teachers who are incorporating technology into their classrooms. This proposal suggests a variety of strategies for fulfilling these stages including workshops, seminars, credit courses, on-line tutorials, and team teaching of faculty of different departments. Faculty need to be rewarded for taking risks and need to be given adequate time and support to make this proposal work.
Introduction
Technology can benefit education in many ways. The right technology used in the right way and at the right time can help teachers and students in the areas of classroom management, instruction, and evaluation. Technology not only affords opportunities and the means to improve traditional instructional strategies but also to reconceptualize classroom practice (Hooper & Rieber, 1995). Published research (e.g. Barron & Orwig, 1997) indicates that the integration of appropriate technology into classroom practice can positively impact areas such as the following:
However, the research also makes it clear that the perceptions, attitudes, and skills of teachers are critical to achieving or thwarting technology's impact (Marcinkiewicz & Regstad, 1996). Helping teachers to develop these skills and attitudes cannot be haphazard or left to chance if we want to deliver on the promises made about technology's future in public education. Technology offers unprecedented potential to democratize access to quality education and Georgia has been a model for the Nation in investing in educational technology in its public schools. Time has come for our College of Education to do its part by developing a systematic plan that will teach preservice teachers how to integrate technology into their future classrooms. Besides, preparing preservice teachers to integrate technology into their teaching is the right thing for the College of Education to do.
Of course, there are other good reasons to do this now, not later. In late March, 2000, HB 1187, Educational Reform passed the Georgia House and Senate, which states:
Universities and colleges having teacher preparation programs for grades pre-kindergarten through 12 shall require students in such programs to be proficient in computer and other instructional technology applications and skills including understanding desktop computers, their applications, integration with teaching and curriculum, and their utilization for individualized instruction and classroom management. There shall be a test to assess the proficiency of students enrolled in teacher preparation programs in computer and other instructional technology applications and skills.
In Florida, the State legislature recently passed a similar law; however, in it they required that all students take a course in basic technology integration as a part of their program of study.
Most recent, the college is faced with meeting NCATE standards as it prepares for its upcoming evaluation. Having a systematic plan in place for technology will address the college's already documented weakness by NCATE in this area while helping us to jump to the front of educational reform efforts through the opportunities of technology.
The integration of technology by teachers into the classroom is a six step process (Russell, 1996). They are the following:
In the College of Education, there is currently no systematic approach that provides our students the training they need to begin creatively incorporating technology into their classrooms once they start teaching.
Current Technology Requirements in the COE
Currently in the COE only a small percentage of students seeking undergraduate degrees preparing them for teacher certification are required to take a basic course that begins to addresses the integration of technology into the classroom.
According to the 1999 - 2000 Undergraduate Student Bulletin:
A. The following departments require a specific course in basic instructional technology competencies/integration for entrance into their program.
B. The following program requires a specific course in basic instructional technology competencies/integration as a part of its major requirements:
C. The following programs do not require a specific course in basic instructional technology competencies/integration although these competencies may be covered in other courses taught in their department:
Proposal
This proposal consists of three stages that will take our students systematically through the important six step process (Awareness, Learning the Process, Understanding the Application of the Process, Familiarity and Confidence, Adaptation to Other Context, and Creative Application to the New Context.) This plan has three stages: Stage 1 - Familiarization; Stage 2 - Creative Application; and Stage 3 - Partnerships.
Stage 1 - Familiarization: In this stage our students will reach the "familiar and confident" level with a number of different technologies, such as electronic communication, presentation programs, Internet site development, databases, and spreadsheets, just to name a few. This will be done before students begin their methods and content areas courses.
Students will then be prepared to work more effectively with their professors in their methods and subject area courses on ways to creatively integrate technology into their specific area of study. The ultimate goal, of course, is to provide Georgia's children with the highest quality and equitable educational experiences possible.
There are a variety of ways in which we could take our students through Stage 1 including workshops, seminars, credit courses, and on-line tutorials. It must be planned, however, and cannot be expected to just happen. Here are two possible scenarios for achieving this stage:
Whichever plan is followed, it must be properly funded and supported by way of additional personnel and resources (e.g. additional computer labs). It is unreasonable to expect any of these units to take on the challenge of helping students in the college reach this stage based on their current budget allocations.
Stage 2 - Creative Application: In this stage faculty will work with students in developing creative applications of the technology into their specific subject area. Since the students will come to these courses already familiar and confident with different technologies, professors will be able to concentrate on their specific subject area and not the teaching of the specific technology.
Departments in the College would then be free to concentrate on technology integration in their specialized area in all of their courses throughout a student's program of study. Faculty can work with students to creatively use technology in their specific subject area. Modeling remains an important factor in determining how beginning teachers learn how to teach and how to manage a classroom -- they will teach the way they were taught. Even new teachers who are technologically sophisticated will not spontaneously opt to use technology effectively unless their methods instructors show them the way.
Therefore, modeling the use of technology in the classroom is an important factor during this stage and can only be expected to be successful if methods instructors are committed stakeholders in this process. Therefore, a program for faculty development should be considered to assist faculty who are interested in learning more about technology integration. Unlike the commonly held perception that most faculty are unwilling to integrate technology into their own teaching, we believe that faculty simply do not have the time or resources to appropriately gain the necessary skills on their own. To expect them to do so without a faculty development plan is unreasonable.
Many faculty development strategies are possible, some of which may be difficult to achieve without rethinking how higher education is traditionally organized or how faculty are rewarded for taking risks. One suggestion is to give methods instructors the opportunity to team teach their methods courses with instructional technology faculty and staff. It may also be possible to pair specific methods courses with specific sections of EDIT 2000 (assuming we can overcome scheduling conflicts). Team teaching requires very different demands in faculty planning time and this too would need to be funded and supported by the college. Faculty who take the risk of exploring the demands and risks of team teaching would need to be supported and encouraged, especially in the beginning when faculty's attitudes and teaching skills are in their most critical formative period. These early periods would be marked by faculty growth and learning with the demonstration of successful classroom outcomes only to be expected later. (Interestingly, the recent "professional development" of the golfer Tiger Woods is a very good analogy to this. His incredible success this year of winning three major championships only came after a period of relatively poor performance during which time he completely overhauled his golf swing. Like our outstanding faculty, he already had the talent and foundation on which to reconceptualize his whole approach to his "classroom practice", and was willing to risk short-term difficulties for long-term gain.)
Stage 3 - Partnerships: In this stage we will partner our students with teachers already in the schools who are incorporating technology into their classrooms and will reinforce what our students have learned in their courses. This could be developed through the InTech program currently being conducted at the College's Technology Training Center. Through a modified or completely redesigned InTech program, COE students would work with teachers who are currently incorporating technology into their working classrooms.
References
Barron, A., & Orwig, G. (1997). New Technologies for Education. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Hooper, S., & Rieber, L. P. (1995). Teaching with technology. In A. C. Ornstein (Ed.), Teaching: Theory into practice (pp. 154-170). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Marcinkiewicz, H. R., & Regstad, N. G. (1996). Using subjective norms to predict teachers' computer use. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 13(1), 27-33.
Russell, A.L., (1996, February). Six Stages for Learning to Use Technology. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the 1996 Association for Educational Communications and Technology Convention, Indianapolis, IN.