Previous by Date | Next by Date | Date Index
Previous by Thread | Next by Thread
| Thread Index
| LM_NET
Archive
| |
> Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 17:57:06 -0400 > Reply-To: The Up for Grabs Discussion List <UPFORGRABS-L@CDINET.COM> > Sender: The Up for Grabs Discussion List <UPFORGRABS-L@CDINET.COM> > From: Kevin Taglang <kevint@BENTON.ORG> > Subject: The Digital Beat -- Technology Professional Development for > Teachers > Comments: To: benton-compolicy@cdinet.com > To: UPFORGRABS-L@CDINET.COM > > The Digital Beat v.1 no. 16 > By Andy Carvin > > Technology Professional Development for Teachers: > Overcoming a Pedagogical Digital Divide > > Introduction > Going Online: The Status of America's Schools > Now That We've Wired Our Schools: Are Teachers Prepared? > Different Teachers, Different Attitudes: > Constructivism and Technology Use > Innovating Professional Development > Conclusion > > > Introduction > > Over the last five years, the United States has increased its priorities > concerning the use of technology in schools. Though technology is by no > means a new addition to the K-12 classroom, the explosive growth of the > Internet has led to a multi-billion dollar commitment to wire America's > schools and integrate digital communications into all levels of curricular > activities. At the federal level, the E-Rate program has to date funded > more than 45,000 schools with over $2.5 billion in telecommunications > subsidies in order to connect these institutions to the Internet. At the > local level, grass-roots campaigns such as Net Day have mobilized > volunteers to wire schools within their communities in order to take the > first steps towards connectivity. > > As the Benton Foundation underscored in its 1997 Learning Connection > report, access to hardware is only one component of providing quality > educational technology to schools. Now that Internet-based instruction is > beginning to percolate into classrooms, attention must turn towards > preparing America's teachers for using Internet technology successfully. > The challenges and issues policymakers must face include educators' varying > attitudes towards instruction, the importance of interaction with their > teaching colleagues and the need for innovative professional development > approaches. > > > Going Online: The Status of America's Schools > > According to the National Center for Education Statistics' most recent > report (February 1999), 89% of US schools had at least one Internet > connection within their campus. This connection is not necessarily > accessible to students, though. For example, a modem-connected PC in the > librarian's office counted as a connected school. The same report found > that 51% of instructional classrooms were connected as well: in other > words, just over half of all classrooms contained at least one Internet > access point for either the teacher alone or for both teacher and students. > These connection rates can be compared to statistics as recent as 1994, > when only 35% of schools and 3% of classrooms were connected. By the end of > the current school year, NCES estimates that 99% of all schools and 88% of > all classrooms will have at least one connection to the Internet. > > It is worth noting that the NCES data warn of the digital divide that still > exists between low-poverty schools and high-poverty schools. In 1998, > though 51% of classrooms nationally were wired to the Internet, only 39% of > schools with high levels of poverty were online. In contrast, 62% of > schools with low levels of poverty were wired. With the help of the $2.25 > billion in annual subsidies from the federal E-Rate program, though, it is > hoped that those schools lagging behind in terms of connectivity will soon > be able to catch up. > > > Now That We've Wired Our Schools: Are Teachers Prepared? > > Despite all the effort that has been placed on wiring America's schools, we > are only beginning to see the attention of policymakers turn towards a > greater question: what should we expect of schools, teachers and students > once they all gain access to the Internet? It is easy to envision schools > where educators transparently integrate new technologies into their > teaching styles, but in truth schools are only beginning to address what > needs to be done to prepare America's teachers to use technology > successfully. A February 1999 report from the US Department of Education > noted that only 20% of America's teachers feel comfortable in integrating > technology into their lessons. This should come as no surprise since few > teachers have had ample opportunity to be exposed to successful technology > integration techniques. Hands-on professional development activities > targeted towards technology integration are very much a new addition for > most schools. > > According to the Milken Exchange on Education Technology's 1998 Progress of > Technology in the Schools study, teachers on average receive less than 13 > hours of technology training per year, and 40% of all teachers have never > received any kind of technology training. Assuming it is offered at all, > this amount of training is far less than what many experts believe is > necessary for a teacher to develop tangible technology integration skills. > As the Department of Education noted in its 1994 Prisoners of Time report, > "New teaching strategies can require as much as 50 hours of instruction, > practice and coaching before teachers become comfortable with them." > Professional development of any kind requires a significant cost > investment; to date, most schools have not chosen to make such a > commitment. While many technology integration experts recommend that > anywhere from 25 to 35 percent of a school's overall technology budget be > dedicated to professional development, most schools on a national average > dedicate no more than three percent of their technology budget. In most > cases, it seems professional development is budgeted as an afterthought > when compared to the costs of equipping schools with the technology itself. > > > Different Teachers, Different Attitudes: Constructivism and Technology Use > > Along with the obvious need to equip teachers with broad technology skills, > professional development programs must also consider teachers' varying > attitudes towards pedagogy and their interaction with their colleagues. > Recent work conducted by Professor Hank Becker at the University of > California/Irvine may help shed light on some of these issues. Becker's > landmark Teaching, Learning and Computing 1999 study > (http://www.crito.uci.edu/TLC/), developed in conjunction with Professor > Ronald Anderson of the University of Minnesota, is one of the first > national studies to examine the complexities of how teachers use computers > and the Internet in their instruction. Several of Becker's findings are > worth exploring. > > In schools where Internet access is readily available there is a > significant range in how teachers have their students utilize the > technology. When the Internet was available directly in the classroom, > nearly 50% of teachers reported having their students use the Internet to > conduct research; in other words, tracking down information and looking up > sources of material was fairly common. Yet only 7% of teachers had their > students use email at least three times during the school year; 6% of > teachers had their students participate in an online project with other > schools; and 4% of teachers had their students publish on the Web. The > Becker study also noted educators' modest interest in publishing their own > materials on the Web, with only 18% of teachers publishing online. This > would suggest that while teachers are beginning to embrace the Internet as > a source for supplying information, the majority of educators have yet to > explore its interactive potential. Student email communications and > Web-based collaborations are still not as commonplace in the classroom as > one might expect, even when there are no obstacles to Internet access. > > One potential reason for this disparity in Internet use might be found in > Becker's discovery that an individual teacher's general attitudes towards > student learning may directly affect how that teacher utilizes the Internet > in his or her classroom. Professor Becker analyzed computer use in terms of > teachers' personal association with constructivist learning techniques. Put > simply, the educational theory of constructivism suggests that students > learn best when they are engaged in the learning process, actively > constructing their own knowledge through collaboration, critical thinking > and inquiry. Constructivism can be contrasted with more traditional > teaching approaches in which students are expected to learn through rote > memorization and repetition. According to Becker, the majority of those > teachers who used their Internet computers regularly considered themselves > constructivist, with a heavy focus on student-centered learning. Teachers > who are more comfortable with face-to-face interactivity and collaboration > among their students are therefore more likely to translate these teaching > styles into a technology-based setting. On the other hand, the majority of > those teachers who had Internet access but did not use it in their teaching > considered themselves traditional and not constructivist, preferring their > students to learn through more conservative teaching techniques. This > result suggests that teachers' attitudes towards constructivist pedagogy > strongly affect whether or not they will encourage their students to use > Internet computers, even if access is ubiquitous. > > Becker's research also suggests that those educators who are comfortable in > actively engaging with their teaching peers are more likely to engage their > students in similar ways. As Becker and Margaret Riel write in one of their > reports from the TLC study: > > "Teachers' instructional styles mirror their own interaction patterns.... > Teachers who learn from their peers, lead their peers, and present their > ideas and opinions to their peers are more likely to have their students do > the same in the classroom. They conduct their classes in a manner similar > to the way they conduct their professional activities." (TLC '98, Snapshot > #3: http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/snapshot3/) > > In other words, those teachers who have taken advantage of interaction > opportunities with other teachers on a regular basis are more likely to > encourage their students to interact in similar ways as well. This point > may be one of the factors that are beginning to dispel the myth that older > teachers are less likely to use technology than younger teachers. According > to the TLC study, older teachers were more likely to engage their > colleagues via email than younger teachers. (Education Week's recent > Technology Counts '99 study found a related result in which older teachers > were no less likely to use computers than younger teachers.) One possible > reason for this is that older teachers have had more opportunities to > develop networks of colleagues inside and outside their school, thus giving > them more reason to use the Internet to interact with these colleagues. > Younger teachers, on the other hand, may lack such networks, especially if > such networking opportunities were not available to them during their > pre-service studies. This raises some intriguing issues as to what kinds of > networking and interaction experiences must be given to young teachers > before coming out of their colleges of education, as well as during their > early in-service teaching years. What do we do to get them more involved > with their colleagues? What do we do to make them a part of a bigger > educational community? > > > Innovating Professional Development > > Hank Becker's ongoing research demonstrates the complexity of the many > issues surrounding professional development and technology integration. > Even when teachers are provided with ample access to technology it may not > be enough to simply train them how to use it. Teaching an educator how to > use Netscape or conduct an Internet search only scratches the surface of > what he or she needs to know in order to successfully utilize the Internet > in the classroom. In many respects there is a pedagogical digital divide at > play: numerous teachers have not been exposed to constructivist teaching > styles or community-building professional development opportunities among > their peers. In order for teachers to embrace the Internet effectively they > must be given opportunities to experiment and explore, to interact with > each other, to learn the benefits of collaboration. Professional > development must be an ongoing activity among a community of educators > rather than a sporadic attempt to introduce educators to new software tools > or the latest Web site. > > The education world is not devoid of such attempts to approach professional > development as a community-building activity. One pioneering model can be > found in the Online Innovation Institute (OII), founded in early 1995 by > Internet educators Ferdi Serim and Bonnie Bracey. OII has developed a > train-the-trainers model for professional development in which they > cultivate local technology leaders to guide reform efforts and mentor > others. Participants in OII workshops learn technology integration through > a method that might be termed as professional development by passion: OII > participants are encouraged to explore the teaching subjects that matter > most to them and to form community groups based on similar interests. For > example, biology teachers with a passion for genetics and the work of > Gregor Mendel may join together to form such a group. They are then > introduced to technology using a constructivist approach in which > participants create online lesson plans and other relevant content based on > the subjects they have chosen. Instead of learning Web browsers or search > engine skills as ends in themselves, they learn them in the context of the > very subjects they care so much about. Not only does this give them a > tangible example of how the Internet can work within their personal > teaching styles, it forges a lasting community of learners that can > continue to collaborate and help scaffold each others' progress as they > gain more technology skills. > > Though one of the first innovative professional development models, the OII > approach is now joined by countless other programs to explore new ways to > foster successful technology integration in the classroom. In August 1999 > the US Department of Education awarded its first round of Preparing > Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology Grants (PTTT). The PTTT program > supports innovative approaches to professional development, funding teams > of higher education institutions, school districts, state agencies and > other educational organizations, with a special emphasis on preparing > pre-service teachers. The program funded three levels of grants. Capacity > Building Grants, averaging $135,000 and lasting one year, were awarded to > 139 consortia to lay the groundwork for technology-focused professional > development programs. Implementation Grants, averaging $390,000 and lasting > three years, were given to 64 consortia to improve existing technology > training programs. Finally, Catalyst Grants, averaging $640,000 over three > years, were provided to 22 national, regional, or statewide consortia with > the expertise to implement large-scale professional development programs. > The US Department of Education hopes that over two million educators will > receive the benefits of these 224 projects over the course of the next ten > years. > > > Conclusion > > As more of America's schools enter the digital age, policymakers, > politicians and parents will undoubtedly expect an accounting of education > technology and its impact in schools. While much progress has been made to > date, it is imperative that more attention be paid to successful > professional development strategies and their implementation at the local, > state and national levels. The Department of Education's PTTT program is an > excellent first step for investing in innovative professional development > activities. Pre-service as well as in-service teachers will both need to > learn how to apply new technologies and adapt them into their teaching > styles. Through a project called Future Learning, the Benton Foundation has > begun to convene creative thinkers from the fields of teacher education and > education reform in order to explore these issues. > > Commercial providers of professional development also have an opportunity > to implement cutting-edge training techniques. As companies invest in the > education technology market, the more they will all need to demonstrate > that their professional development offerings lead to measurable results. > Benton's Future Learning is also bringing in corporate innovators already > at work in identifying the issues with which teacher colleges will need to > contend in the digital age. Through this and other initiatives, > professional development will hopefully begin to occupy a more privileged > position as policy leaders set education priorities. The discussion over > professional development must also occur at the community level: parents, > teachers, administrators and local leaders must understand the complexity > of education technology integration and the need to craft broad strategies > for its success. > > When it comes to education technology, no school can afford to ignore > professional development. Not every teacher will adapt easily to a > technology-rich educational environment. The current lack of national focus > on professional development inhibits the advancement of the Internet as a > powerful ally in the quest for education reform. > > ---------------- > > Andy Carvin (acarvin@benton.org) is author of the pioneering education Web > site EdWeb: Exploring Technology and School Reform (http://edweb.gsn.org) > as well as the moderator of WWWEDU (listproc@ready.cpb.org), the Internet's > longest running email discussion on the role of the Web in education. Andy > recently joined the Benton Foundation's Communication Policy and Practice > program. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > (c)Benton Foundation, 1999. Redistribution of this email publication - both > internally and externally -- is encouraged if it includes this message. > > This and past issues of Digital Beat are available online at > (www.benton.org/DigitalBeat). The Digital Beat is a free online news service > of the Benton Foundation's Communications Policy & Practice program > (www.benton.org/cpphome.html). > > *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* > > To join Benton's Up For Grabs Discussion Forum (which also > includes the daily Headlines service), send email to: > listserv@cdinet.com > In the body of the message, type only: > subscribe upforgrabs-L YourFirstName YourLastName > > To unsubscribe, send email to: > listserv@cdinet.com > In the body of the message, type only: > signoff upforgrabs-L > > If you have any problems with the service, please direct them to > benton@benton.org > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-= All postings to LM_NET are protected under copyright law. To quit LM_NET (or set-reset NOMAIL or DIGEST), send email to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST 4) SET LM_NET MAIL * Please allow for confirmation from Listserv For LM_NET Help & Archives see: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=