1

Implementation of a technology-enhanced problem-based learning curriculum:

Supporting teachers’ efforts

American Educational Research Association (AERA)Montréal, CanadaApril 13, Wed. 200512:25-1:55Fairmont The Queen Elizabeth

Sung Hee Park Purdue University

Jeff Cramer Taylor University

Peg Ertmer Purdue University

2

Agenda

• Background

• Purpose of the study

• Methods

• Results

• Discussion and Implications

3

Background

• Technology in K-12 classroom– 99% of public school teachers have computers in their

schools– Internet connectivity has increased

• 65% (1996) 95% (1999)

• 2/3 of teachers don’t feel well-prepared to use technology in teaching

• Teachers’ preparation and training is a key factor(NCES,

2000)

4

Background

• Barriers to staff development– Opportunities to practice– Access to resources and expertise– Support from the community– Having on-site assistance and support (Lewis, 1998)

• Importance of having instruction related to both technology skills and integration ideas instead of one alone (Trotter, 1999)

5

Background• Problem-Based Learning (PBL) approach

– An effective way to integrate technology– “Experiential learning, organized around the investigation and resolution of

messy, real-world problems” (Sage, 2000)

– Teacher technology development can use the same problem-centered method that is suggested for students in problem-based learning (Hill, 1999)

– Technology is a critical tool • information searching• modeling task or content • decision making, and presenting solutions during PBL activities

– Technology integration with PBL can be a meaningful learning experience for both teachers and students (Jonassen, Howland, Moore, & Marra, 2003).

6

Purpose of the Study

• What are teachers’ perceptions of, and pedagogical beliefs about, technology-enhanced PBL?

• What kinds of barriers and support do teachers encounter while implementing technology-enhanced PBL?

• What kinds of strategies are needed to provide effective staff development in using technology- enhanced PBL?

7

Methodology

• July, 2002 ~ June, 2003• 3-stage data collection

– 2 week summer institute: Survey, interview, journal

– Fall semester, 2002: Interview, field notes, observation

– Spring semester, 2003: Survey, interview, field notes

8

Methodology• Case study• Participants

– 3 teachers from the same middle school

Name Subject Grade Experience

Carrie Science & Social studies 6th 4 years

Jake Social studies 6th & 7th 2 years

David Social studies & Reading 6th 3 years

9

Results

1st Stage : The Summer Institute

• Improving technology skills & knowledge• Increasing confidence through hands-on activity• Gaining insights

– the role of the teacher – connection with PBL and implementation in the

classroom

Suggestions for Improvement• More examples of PBL units that work in the classroom

10

Results2nd Stage (Fall semester)

• Frequent use of technology• Increased comfort with various software applications• Barriers

– losing the team preparation time– working around standardized tests required by the

state: little time to introduce technology and to practice mini-PBL strategies

11

Results3rd Stage (Spring semester)

• Implementing PBL unit – 6th grade– Topic: history of their community

• Survey data – technology expertise: 0.4 increase– their beliefs about student centered learning: 0.3 increase

• Interview data– teachers’ technology comfort level increased– teachers’ role as a facilitator and students’ role as a

researcher and instructor to other students– time and resource barriers

12

Results• Change in teachers’ pedagogical beliefs

– More comfort in using technology– Realization that students were more engaged in learning

• Perceived ideal staff development for tech integration– Beginner: other teachers with different levels of technology

and PBL experience– Intermediate

• some practical guidelines that could refresh their knowledge, new technology skills,

• more hands-on activities with their own units to modify• feedback from other teachers outside of their own groups.

13

Discussion and Implications (1)• 1st stage

• Feel “comfortable” with technology• Feel overwhelmed and isolated

• 2nd stage• Team preparation time• Administrative support to impact implementation of new

teaching method

• 3rd stage• Shift in pedagogical beliefs in using technology

enhanced PBL• Adopt mini-PBL activities before PBL unit• Collaboration among teachers

14

Discussion and Implications (2)• Effective development

– Practice both technology skills and PBL strategies– Provide time for developing their own units

• Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate with• Experts

– Graduate course– Professional development

• Other teachers– Peer coaching/peer collaboration

• Continuous administrative support• Providing team preparation time• Encouraging teachers to develop a joint unit (collaboration)• Creating school culture that values the sharing of teachers’ experience

15

Questions?

16

More information

• Tech-Know-Build Project websitehttp://research.education.purdue.edu/challenge

• Contact information• Sung Hee Park:

park32@purdue.edu• Jeff Cramer

jfcramer@tayloru.edu• Peg Ertmer

pertmer@purdue.edu