pt 3 preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology march 9, 2005 tobye rae nelson

PT3

Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology

March 9, 2005

Tobye Rae Nelson

[email protected]

2

Background…

“Technology is not central to the teacher preparation experience in most colleges of education”

“Most new teachers graduate from teacher preparation institutions with limited knowledge of the ways technology can be used in their professional practice”

Office of Technology Assessment, Teaching and Technology: Making the Connection,1995, p. 165

3

Created to Address Challenge….

In 1999, 98% of schools and 85% of classrooms have Internet access

Only 1 in 3 teachers feel well-prepared to teach with technology

New teachers are still graduating with limited computer integration skills

70% of teachers are not using the equipment they currently have

4

SYSTEMIC CHANGESYSTEMIC CHANGE

Needed in teacher preparation if schools are to meet the needs of 21st century learners

PT3’s Solution: Transform Teacher Education

5

To improve the capacity of institutions of higher education (IHE) to implement high quality, technology-centered teacher preparation programs

PT3’s Program Goal…

6

PT3 Program History: 1999-2002

$M

• 441 Grants - $337 M• >35 HBCU’s• >25 HSI’s

• 52 of the largest 100 teacher preparation programs

$75 $75

$125

$62.5

$0$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

7

PT3 Program History: 1999-2002• Average annual grant size:

• Capacity 138• 1 yr. $120,000

• Implementation 253• 3 yrs. $335,000

• Catalyst 50• 3 yrs. $586,000

8

Types of Grants…

Capacity BuildingOne-year grants awarded in the first year of the program to enable consortium partners to take initial step toward comprehensive teacher preparation program improvement with technology.

9

Types of Grants…

ImplementationThree-year grants to support colleges, schools, state agencies, and others that are ready to initiate and sustain long-term program improvements to prepare technology-proficient educators.

10

Types of Grants…

CatalystThree-year grants to support national, regional, or state consortia with the expertise to provide leadership for large-scale teacher preparation improvements and systemic reforms.

11

PTPT33 Scope and Size… Scope and Size…

1999 2000 2001

# of Grants Ave. Grant Size Per Yr. # of Grants Ave. Grant

Size Per Yr. # of Grants Ave. Grant Size Per Yr.

Capacity Building* 138 $120,000 N/A N/A

Implementation 64 $390,000 115 $320,000 74 $337,000

Catalyst 23 $644,000 12 $570,000 15 $613,000

12

How Does PTHow Does PT33 Work… Work…

Creates a dialogue on the needs of teacher preparation programs between and among key stakeholders

Meets a real need and fills a void Raises the bar Leverages resources Creates the opportunity and the mechanism to

innovate, adapt and disseminate

13

PT3 Grant Strategies…

Faculty development Course restructuring Certification policy

changes Online teacher

preparation Enriched-

Networked-Virtual

Texas Woman’s University: Student

Mentoring

14

PT3 Grant Strategies…

Video case studies Electronic portfolios Mentoring triads Embedded assessments Handheld computer applications

University of Virginia’s Handheld Computers

Project

15

Diffusion of Innovations*

* Everett Rogers

16

Stages of Concern

Awareness Knowledge (Concern)

Relevancy (Attitude) Readiness Trial

BehaviorSustained Behavior

Awareness Attitudes Belief Behavior

“If They Don’t Know… They DON’T KNOW”

17

Attitudes Technology Integration

Lack of tech support, incentives, still biggest obstacles

Skepticism – where’s the proof? Rank & file don’t understand true meaning of

“technology integration” Technology integration leads to technology

proficiency

18

“Change will only happen once skeptics and laggards RETIRE.”

“Technology is being pushed down faculty throats.”

“Why has all this money been spent on technology and not on faculty salaries?”

“University professors are not socialized to SHARE, they’re socialized to KEEP.”

Faculty and Deans Say…

19

“Some of my colleagues use PowerPoint but also make overheads as a back-up, so it’s just adding time.”

“If one link is broken, if the server is down, or you can’t turn on the projector--you’re dead. Go through that once and it’ll be a long time before you dare try it again.”


20

“I used to get to class 10 minutes early, now I have to go 30 minutes earlier just to make sure the technology is working…”

“The bottom line: what DIFFERENCE does this make in learning?”


21

Over-reliance on soft money is dangerous Uncertainty paralysis or inspiration Who owns the rights? Clarify this early! Need different grant types

Observations and Generalizations…

22

Standards are just a starting point Stronger evaluation needed Higher ed is resistant to change Understanding of system reform lacking Top-down leadership necessary

Observations & Generalizations

23

Model technology institution-wide Dissemination lacking Internal and external PR skills lacking Too much re-inventing the wheel

Observations & Generalizations

24

PT3 Resources…www.pt3.org

25

The “ELC”

PT3 Resources: ELC Intranet

26

PT3 Resources: Grantee Tools

Online Database– Grantee Resources– Strategies– Other Useful Tools

27

PT3 & Bush Administration…

“No Child Left Behind Act” 2002

New emphasis on results accountability State & local flexibility Focuses resources on proven educational

methods Consolidates technology programs

28

Case Study…TWU

Three-year Implementation grant $575,028 1999-2002 Learning and Integrating New

Knowledge and Skills (LINKS) www7.twu.edu/~f_snider/links

29

Case Study…TWU

IHE & Other Impact– Education Faculty 75– Humanities Faculty 2– Math & Science Faculty 5– Pre-service Teachers 300– Pre K-12 Teachers 125

30

Case Study…TWU

Content Focus– Online Delivery or Distance Learning for

Pre-service Teachers– Teacher Technology Standards or

Assessments– Faculty Professional Development

31

Case Study…TWU

Products– Standards Based Materials– Courses– Workshops– Research

32

Collaborative Exchange…

Site Visits--participate in three, host one

Partners within same strand

33

Lessons Learned…Faculty

Hire students and in-service teachers to provide technology support to faculty on an individual basis– University of North Carolina– Texas A&M

34


Conduct a needs assessment to ensure all faculty development activities will meet real needs of the faculty (problems-based approach)– University of Houston

35


Offer incentives to faculty such as mini-grants, free or loaned technology equipment, and stipends – even let faculty choose among them

Specify all expected deliverables– Sonoma State University– University of Nevada, Las Vegas– University of Missouri, St. Louis

36


Involve faculty in project planning and implementation– Maryland State Dept. of Education– Mississippi Dept. of Education– University of North Carolina

37


Communicate the availability of training opportunities frequently and in varied formats– Virginia Educational Technology Alliance– Maryland Dept. of Education– Texas Woman’s University

38


Provide a continuum of professional development opportunities, such as credits, individual assistance, group training sessions, mentoring, online resources, and just-in-time support– Texas Woman’s University– Mississippi Dept. of Education

39


Commission material and tool development that meet faculty specifications so that faculty can move to the use of technology without being slowed down by a lack of technical expertise in developing it– University of North Carolina

40


Set up technology methods summits for faculty– College of William & Mary

41

Lessons Learned…Students

Require students to create products using technology– Texas Woman’s University

42


Have faculty model technology integration in their courses on a regular basis– University of North Carolina

43


Embed technology workshops within existing teacher education courses; design curricula with technology in mind, rather than shoehorning technology into existing courses– University of Alaska-Anchorage– University of California-Irvine

44


Provide workshops and one-on-one assistance in addition to online instructions for setting up e-portfolios– Maryland Dept. of Education– Eastern Kentucky University

45


Provide (or loan) hardware to students for use in their field placements– College of William and Mary– Texas A&M University

46


Conduct a needs assessment to establish a starting point among student’s skills; don’t assume that students are all technology savvy– University of Alaska-Anchorage

47


Extend technology into tools for online study and review, at the student’s pace and timing– University of California-Irvine

48


Facilitate technology internships for pre-service teachers– College of William and Mary

49

Lessons Learned…Sustainment

Align courses with ISTE’s National Educational Technology Standards (NETS)– Maryland State Dept. of Education– University of North Carolina– Virginia Educational Technology Alliance

50


Link courses to the NCATE accreditation process– Maryland State Dept. of Education

51


Establish a technology requirement for tenure, teaching credentials, and other professional accomplishments– Sonoma State University

52


Incorporate technology usage into annual reviews

Have faculty create personal, measurable technology plans– Sonoma State University

53


Align project strategies with the university’s strategic plan

Keep evolving and providing training for participants who are ready to advance– Texas Woman’s University– California State University-Bakersfield

54


Create model school programs as demonstration projects for others– California Commission on Teacher

Credentialing

55


Develop partnerships to expand resources, sustain commitment– University of North Carolina– Miami Museum of Science

56


Involve local faculty and inservice teachers upfront to solicit ideas and create buy-in– University of North Carolina

57


Demonstrate that university leadership really means it: open up to all departments and seek “unusual bedfellows”– Texas Woman’s University– San Francisco State University

58


Develop database of projects and products for the benefit of future participants– University of Houston– University of Northern Iowa

59


Help develop a full “learning community” by assisting schools where pre-service teachers have met resistance simply because the technology is not up to date– St. Bonaventure University

60


Promote digital equity– Mississippi State Dept. of Education

61

For More Information Visit…

www.pt3.org

www.ed.gov/teachtech

pt 3 preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology march 9, 2005 tobye rae nelson

Documents