|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
Research summary
Pay Now or Pay LaterA crucial element for guaranteeing a return on technology expenditures is professional development (Bailey & Pownell, 1998; Consortium for School Networking, 1999; Norman, 1999). Associated costs (trainers, materials, substitute teachers, etc.) can be high, but the costs of neglecting this critical step may be even higher. Failure to implement an effective, ongoing professional development initiative will severely limit a school's or district's ability to achieve its technology goals (Consortium for School Networking, 1999; Panel on Educational Technology, 1997). The U.S. Department of Education recommends that districts set aside 30 percent of their technology budgets for professional development; research indicates that expenditures are closer to 10 percent (Zeisler in AEL, 2000). Without effective professional training and adequate support, teachers may not fully integrate technology into their teaching and learning activities (Bailey & Pownell, 1998). The amount of technology training teachers receive directly impacts how technology is used in the classroom and, consequently, how and what students learn (Norman, 1999). Those who provide such training have been called on to rethink methods and approaches commonly used in past efforts. It is becoming clear that "one-size-fits-all" workshops in which teachers get a generic overview of concepts or skills are not sufficient. This approach fails to take into consideration different levels of proficiency, provides little opportunity for practice, and rarely includes any follow-up (Fulton, 1996; Hurst, 1994; Jackson, 1999; Tally & Grimaldi, 1995). One survey reports that 46 percent of courses designed to help teachers integrate technology are offered as half-day workshops, and 79 percent of these workshops focus on specific hardware, software, or Internet usage (Panel on Educational Technology, 1997). These approaches are inefficient and ineffective--especially in regard to integrating technology into the curriculum (Fulton, 1996). Teachers report that professional development offerings in technology have been positive but too short and infrequent (Hurst, 1994). In 1999, the U.S. Department of Education reported that only 20 percent of public school teachers felt "very well prepared" to integrate educational technology into the classroom (as cited in Norman, 1999.) The one-size-fits-all approach ignores both adult developmental processes (Tally & Grimaldi, 1995) and the well-documented stages of technology adoption through which most teachers progress (Dwyer, Ringstaff, & Sandholtz, 1991; Jackson, 1999). Caverly and Peterson (1997) suggest that a productive training model would focus on educating teachers and administrators on technology's potential uses so that they could later apply their training to new technologies. In fact, there is widespread agreement that training should focus on integration rather than basic skills development (CEO Forum, 1999; Coley, Cradler & Engel, 1997; Kozma and Schank, 1998; Tally & Grimaldi, 1995; Thornburg, 2000). An integral component of such development is time. Teachers need time to build skills, to become familiar with software and content, and to practice integrating technology into their content area and learning activities. Teachers need the opportunity to discuss technology with their peers and may benefit from ongoing mentoring and consultative support. The commitment to this scope of professional development should be addressed early--in the school or district's technology plan (Panel on Educational Technology, 1997). In their 1999 report, the CEO Forum recommends that
The Forum calls for standards that address continuing education, teacher and administrator proficiency that is supported by long-term professional development, and appropriate technology integration components. For the full report, visit http://www.ceoforum.org/reports.html. Successful professional development should focus on improving student achievement and should support the mission and goals set forth by the district or school (Norman, 1999). This focus emphasizes people, not technology. Professional development must be ongoing and designed to help teachers teach better, students to learn better, and communities to improve their public schools (CEO Forum, 1999). Effective school leaders engage in professional development alongside instructional staff.
Consideration should also be given to the characteristics of adult learners, who have a much more developed set of beliefs than do children. In particular, educators have often developed instructional strategies and methods that they feel work best for them and may be slow to change (Tally & Grimaldi, 1995). Educators weigh new methods, materials, and theories against personal experiences and their existing knowledge base. They evaluate the value of the new data in comparison to both their own and their student's learning needs. Programs that reflect this understanding offer educators the opportunity to experiment and reflect in a safe setting, as well as opportunities to collaborate and discuss ideas with their peers (Fulton, 1996).
Key elements for professional development include clear goals, time, communication, and collaboration. Trainers and presenters must understand the level of technology proficiency of their audience (Atkins & Vasu, 1998) and provide opportunities for teachers and administrators to link training to their individual needs as well as those of their students and the required curricula (CEO Forum, 1999; Coley, Cradler & Engel, 1997). New technologies and related strategies must be presented in the context of learning (Warner & Akins, 1999). Participants must experiment and practice to develop confidence with new technologies (Fulton, 1996).
Many researchers and practitioners agree that successful professional development gives participants opportunities to collaborate and communicate with their peers. Peer coaching is often more effective than the lecture format (Coley, Cradler & Engel, 1997). Collaboration, discussion, and mentoring can be supported on-line. Educators also need opportunities to reflect individually on the skills, practices, challenges, and opportunities afforded by continued technology application (Fulton, 1996; Warner & Akins, 1999).
Norman (1999, p. 19-20) provides eight components of effective professional development programs.
Skeele (1999) acknowledges that it is important to know the expertise and interest level of participants. Session topics should address participant needs--especially daily classroom needs. Examples should be relevant to classroom teachers, and the introductory session should include an opportunity for teachers to apply their new knowledge. Helpful supporting materials include an agenda, a list of helpful tips, and complete price and product specifications that include hardware configurations (Skeele, 1999).
Several trends observed among professional development models may be applied or adapted to help develop successful programs locally.
Development centers. Technology training centers are found both in K-12 settings and higher education (Candiotti & Clarke, 1998; Fons & Wyler, 1995; Hurst, 1995; Shapiro & Cartwright, 1998). They can offer a full spectrum of training opportunities, staff versed in technology integration and instructional design, and a plethora of hardware and software to introduce educators to new and emerging technologies with possible application in their classrooms.
Centers are used not only for structured training sessions but also to encourage experimentation in a safe, nurturing environment. Noting that teachers sometimes felt uncomfortable or intimidated demonstrating their emerging technology skills, one school dedicated a small room to continuous technology in-service (Hurst, 1994). This room was filled with all the hardware and software available throughout the school as well as accompanying peripherals, workbooks, and manuals. Another school established a demonstration and training site that doubles as a lending center for hardware and a preview center for software (Fons & Wyler, 1995). This center can support a variety of professional development presentation options, such as vendor-supplied training, train-the-trainer sessions, collaborative professional development, and interdisciplinary unit development.
Train-the-trainer and collaborative models. The unifying factor of these models is the reliance on human resources to generate continued support. In one district (Schmidt, Sasser, Linduska, Murphy, & Grether, 1999), educators work with preservice and in-service teachers through mentoring programs, courses, and focus groups. To optimize training time, group in-service sessions are followed up by demonstration of software by trainers in actual classrooms. Preservice candidates are paired with in-service teachers two to four hours per week.
Described as using a "generational" model, another district (Caverly & Mandeville, 1997) grooms strong early adopters to help future generations of teachers effectively integrate technology. The early adopters attend a "technology boot camp" for three weeks during the summer, focusing on integration in interdisciplinary, thematic units. Throughout the following school year, first-generation integrators receive additional training as they create and share further interdisciplinary units. Peer support and evaluation help this group become experts in their own right. The following summer, the cycle continues: Each first-generation teacher returns to boot camp--but this time as a mentor. As the number of participants grows, these teachers become valuable resources in their schools.
Modeling their projects after such successes as Generation www.Y, some schools have capitalized on one of their largest human resources, their students (Lowe & Vespestad, 1999). Technology often increases student interest and motivation, and some districts have found that young adopters can help teachers build basic technology skills and apply them to effective integration practices. Even elementary and middle school students can help with basic troubleshooting and routine maintenance. One school even reports using students teams to lead staff in-service sessions. These same students also help community members build their technology skills in the evenings (Lowe & Vespestad, 1999).
Using technology to support professional development. Technology itself may be utilized to support successful professional development activities. Telecommunications applications allow teachers to interact, take courses, and access research across great distances (Coley, Cradler & Engel, 1997).
Web-based professional development offers greater flexibility in terms of scheduling as well as pacing. Costs associated with other types of training (i.e., substitute teachers, travel costs) may be avoided. Web-based professional development includes on-line lectures, opportunities for chat and threaded discussions, tutorials, resources cataloged in searchable databases, and video components for modeling (Jackson, 1999).
One Web-based model (Rodes, Knapczyk, Chapman & Haejin, 2000) supplements field-based activities in the participants' own classroom with distance-based elements. Technology is introduced slowly. The program has demonstrated success by beginning with technologies that teachers readily become accustomed to, such as fax machines and e-mail. Technology skills build to include web-based conferencing.
Telecommunications are not the only technical application of professional development, as some districts utilize technology to support local efforts. Electronic portfolios are a popular application of technology that helps demonstrate skill acquisition while allowing for individual creativity. Portfolios have been described as the most appropriate and authentic means to chronicle and demonstrate professional improvement over time (Wiedmer, 1998). Telecommunications tools, electronic portfolios, and other applications will undoubtedly find a greater foothold in professional development activities as teachers become more familiar with the possibilities of technology.
AEL. (2000). Principal connections: A guide to technology leadership. [Computer Software]. Charleston, WV: AEL.
Atkins, N. & Vasu, E. (1998). The teaching with technology instrument. Learning & Leading With Technology, 25(8), 35-39.
Bailey, G. & Pownell, D. (1998). Technology staff-development and support programs: Applying Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Learning & Leading With Technology, 26(3), 47-51,64.
Candiotti, A. & Clarke, N. (1998). Combining universal access with faculty development and academic facilities. Communications of the ACM, 41(1), 36-41.
Caverly, D. C., Peterson, C. L., & Mandeville, T. F. (1997). A generational model for professional development: Training teachers to use computers. Educational Leadership, 55(3), 56-59.
CEO Forum. (1999, February). Professional development: A link to better learning. (Year Two Report). Washington, DC: Author. Available: http://www.ceoforum.org/reports.html#
Coley, R. J., Cradler, J. & Engel, P. K. (1997). Computers and classrooms: The status of technology in U.S. Schools. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Available: http://preservicetech.edreform.net/resource/2296
Consortium for School Networking. (1999). Taking TCO to the classroom. A school administrator's guide to planning for the total cost of new technology. Washington, DC: Consortium for School Networking. Available: http://classroomtco.cosn.org/news.html#release
Dwyer, D. C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J. H. (1991). Changes in teachers' beliefs and practices in technology-rich classrooms. Educational Leadership, 48(8), 45-52.
Fons, R. & Wyler, K. (1995). How schools organize technology training. Media & Methods, 31(May/June), 10, 46.
Fulton, K. (1996). Moving from boxes and wires to 21st Century teaching. T.H.E. Journal, 24(4), 76-79.
Kozma, R. & Schank, P. (1998). Connecting with the 21st Century: Technology in support of educational reform. In C. Dede (Ed.), Learning with Technology. 1998 ASCD Yearbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 416 857)
Jackson, R. (1999). Just in time: Web delivered professional development. T.H.E. Journal, 26(8), 26.
Lowe, M. J. & Vespestad, K. M. (1999). Using technology as a tool to enhance teaching and learning. NASSP Bulletin, 83(607), 30-37.
Norman, M. (1999). Beyond hardware. The American School Board Journal, 186(7), 17-20.
Panel on Educational Technology. (1997, March). Report to the President on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States. Available: http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/NSTC/PCAST/k-12ed.html
Rodes, P., Knapczyk, D., Chapman, C., & Haejin, C. (2000). Involving teachers in web-based professional development. T.H.E. Journal, 27(10), 94.
Schmidt, D., Sasser, S., Linduska, S., Murphy, V. & Grether, C. (1999) Collaborative research partners: Technology integration model that supports learning communities. In SITE 99: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. San Antonio, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 432 291)
Shapiro, W. & Cartwright, G. (1998). New ways to link technology and faculty development. Change, 30(5), 50-52.
Skeele, L. (1999). Professional development that they will cheer for. Book Report, 17(4), 20-23.
Tally, W. & and Grimaldi, C. (1995). Developmental training: Understanding the ways teachers learn. Electronic Learning, 14(May/June), 14-15.
Thornburg, D. (2000). Technology in K-12 education: Envisioning a new future. The Forum on Technology in Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available: http://www.air.org/forum/wpapers.htm
Warner, M. & Akins, M. (1999). Training today's teachers for tomorrow's classrooms. T.H.E. Journal, 27(3), 118.
Wiedmer, T. (1998). Portfolios: A means for documenting professional development. Journal of Staff, Program & Organizational Development, 16(1), 21-37.
[top] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
