Student/Peer Technology Mentors: Students or faculty peers are used as technology assistants or mentors for technical or curricular support of faculty and K-12 teachers.
Portfolios: Pre-service teachers, teachers, or faculty use portfolios as a means of demonstrating competency in technological integration.
Small Grants: Money is given to faculty, teachers, or student teachers for equipment, software, etc. in a competitive or non-competitive process to support innovative ideas.
Creation of Resources: For example, databases of lesson plans, videotape, or other resources for teachers or faculty integrating technology into their instruction.
Teams or Communities: Pre-service teachers, K-12 teachers, and or faculty combine in learning communities or work together in groups to develop curricula or to accomplish a particular technology integration goal.
Assess Tech Competence: K-12 teachers, preservice teachers, and/or faculty?s technology skills are assessed through performance assessments or other specific tool.
Faculty Development: Workshops, conferences, and other similar strategies are used to give professional development to faculty and K-12 teachers.
Field Experience: The project focuses upon integrating technology into student teachers? field experience.
Evaluation: The chapter primarily focuses upon evaluation of PT3 projects.
Volume I Chapters
I N T R O D U C T I O N Achieving the Vision of Technologically Powerful Teachers
What We Can Learn from PT3 Project Outcomes
Steve Rhine, Willamette University |
C H A P T E R 1 Pathways for Change
Facilitating Faculty Empowerment
Rachel A. Vannatta, Savilla Banister, John M. Fischer, Trinka Messenheimer, and Cindy Ross, Bowling Green State University
This chapter describes the journey we took through a maze of change in teacher education at a large college of education. Significantly restructuring our PT3 grant project in its Xfinal year to better facilitate its objectives, the project leadership implemented four initiatives: a Technology Faculty Team, a Curriculum Grants Program, an Assessment of Technology Competencies, and a Teacher Education Portfolio Committee. By giving voice to faculty, thereby empowering them, these initiatives created a solid pathway for the change process. |
C H A P T E R 2 Modeling Technology Integration in Instruction
Inquiry Learning in Teacher Education Courses
Nancy Wentworth and Rodney Earle, Brigham Young University
Teacher education professional development programs often teach people how to use technology but not how to use technology to solve educational problems. This PT3 implementation grant focused on changing that by supporting design teams, made up of teacher education and content area faculty, who enriched preservice teacher education courses and K–12 curriculum with inquiry-based technology integration. The teams modeled technology-enhanced instruction to preservice teachers, who then wrote lesson plans based on the models. They implemented these lesson plans during K–12 field experiences. |
C H A P T E R 3 Taking-Off or Taking Off
What Makes a Professional Development Experience Last?
Bill Fisk, Clemson University; and Kay R. Sloan, Rockman et al
Project Jericho provided virtually no direct technology training, rejecting the frontalassault model typically used for building skills. Jericho built partnerships between K–12 teachers and university teacher education and Arts and Sciences faculty by breaking down communication walls and changing mindsets, allowing participants to take off in their technology integration development. |
C H A P T E R 4 Evidence of a Successful Partnership
Universities Working Closely with Area Schools
Scott Alan Hutchens, Delta State University
Our PT3 project compared the technology skills of Delta State University preservice teachers who student taught at Hayes Cooper Elementary School (a partnership school) with those of a random selection of Delta State University preservice teachers who student taught at other Mississippi Delta area schools. The current data demonstrate that a close partnership between a university and an elementary school can be a worthwhile and productive endeavor. |
C H A P T E R 5 A Collaborative University-Public Schools Project
A Consultant-Client Model to Enhance Classroom Integration of Technology
Maria Cseh, George Washington University; James Quinn, Anne Porter, and John McEneaney, Oakland University
Preservice teachers in this project served as personal technology consultants to experienced educator clients: K–8 classroom teachers and university-level faculty members. Future teachers developed the ability to make and implement high-quality, autonomous decisions regarding the use of technology in their classrooms to effect optimal student learning. Guidelines are presented for teacher education programs and school districts that wish to replicate this approach. |
C H A P T E R 6 Communities and Portfolios
Infusing Web-Based Tools into Teacher Preparation Programs
Jacqueline A. Nunn, Betsy Lowry, David Peloff, and Elaine Pierrel, Johns Hopkins University
Like many other educators involved in PT3 projects, we at Johns Hopkins University found that providing scheduled formal training for faculty is not the most effective strategy for building technology integration. By embedding online tools as core components of the M.A.T. program, both faculty and preservice teachers were compelled to find ways to develop the skills they needed to use the tools. Nothing could be mandated for all; each teacher preparation program had to make decisions about what, when, and how to adopt technology. Ongoing communication with faculty leaders, customization of implementation to address the unique needs and concerns of specifc programs, and provision of effective training and support systems enhanced the chances of success. |
C H A P T E R 7 Formative Evaluation of PT3 Projects
Peer Review and the Systematic Study of What Works
Helene Jennings, Technical Director, ORC Macro International; and Lavona Grow, former Acting Director, PT3 Program, U.S. Department of Education
A goal of PT3 was to make evaluation a more integral part of grantees’ projects. To evaluate what was learned from individual projects and facilitate sharing this evaluation with the field, an independent opinion research consulting firm (ORC Macro) designed and implemented a peer review approach. Evaluation focused on answers to the following questions: What factors most facilitated success? What were the most common barriers to success? What lessons can be learned from these projects? How might programs provide better support to grantees? |
C H A P T E R 8 Teacher Educators’ Interactions with Technology
How Does It Change Us?
Cheryl L. Rosaen, Michigan State University
Which PT3-funded innovations reveal the power of technology, and how can faculty participate in productive and meaningful technology environments? This chapter highlights transformations in my conception of technology, my patterns of use, and my participation in multiple communities of practice. These transformations led to technology integration at the course and program levels. |
C H A P T E R 9 Collaboration as Catalyst for Change
Oregon Technology in Education Network Project
Mark Bailey, Pacifc University; Steve Rhine, Willamette University; and Jim Carroll, University of Portland
The vision of the Oregon Technology in Education Network (OTEN) is to use a systemic approach to foster the integration of technological tools into teaching and learning by tomorrow’s teachers. Our project encouraged technological innovation in support of powerful pedagogical practice, by preservice teachers and by practicing K–12 teachers, in teacher education classrooms. While we utilized conferences, grants, and other development tools, the catalyst for the transformations that emerged was the establishment of a collaborative community among participating educators across institutions. |
C H A P T E R 1 0 Technology Connections in Teacher Education
Lessons from Faculty Development, Electronic Portfolios, and Virtual Field Experiences Involving Distant Locations
James D. Lehman, Jennifer Richardson, Erik Malewski, and JoAnn Phillion, Purdue University
This project restructured teacher preparation programs by providing support for faculty development, implementation of an electronic portfolio system, and field experiences involving videoconferencing with diverse schools at distant locations. These initiatives promoted faculty connections with students, preservice teachers’ connections with standards, and university connections with diverse K–12 schools. |
C H A P T E R 11 A Faculty Mentoring Program
Professional Development in Technology Integration
David R. Wizer, William A. Sadera, and Tammy Banerjee, Towson University
The Towson University College of Education has been engaged in a systematic, technology- based faculty development program that includes peer faculty mentoring in the teacher education program and in our Professional Development School (PDS) Network. This project has enhanced technology use, teaching, and collaboration among teacher education and PDS faculty. |
C H A P T E R 1 2 Project TITUS
Teachers Infusing Technology in Urban Schools
Kimberly Lawless, Louanne Smolin, and Joshua Radinsky, University of Illinois at Chicago; and Scott W. Brown, University of Connecticut
This project included design teams made up of faculty from the College of Education and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, teachers from K–12 classrooms, and technology consultants from Chicago Public Schools. These teams combined diverse perspectives to produce learning experiences informed by daily urban classroom realities, in-depth knowledge of content domain, and awareness of how technology can create effective instructional activities. Faculty gained tehnology skills as well as ongoing and “on-demand” support, and they became aware of the methods, strategies, and pedagogy for integrating technology into their teaching practice. |
C H A P T E R 1 3 Creating a Networked Learning Community
Pedagogical Renewal in Technology Education
Mesut Duran and Paul R. Fossum, University of Michigan–Dearborn
The MITTEN project created a networked learning community involving preservice dteachers, inservice teachers, and education faculty. The model combined core coursework, faculty modeling, and technology-enriched Xeld experiences in a program of teacher preparation and professional development. The model responded to the need for a comprehensive program for preparing technology-proficient educators. |
C H A P T E R 1 4 Comparative Findings From Two PT3 Projects
Advances in Preservice Educators’ Competence and Confidence in Technology Integration
Rhonda Christensen and Gerald Knezek, University of North Texas; and Dawn Parker, Texas A&M University
This chapter compares preservice courses and outcomes from two PT3 projects that used different approaches to produce similar results. The primary goal was to compare and contrast methods-infused technology courses with technology-infused methods courses. Common instruments were employed to increase the comparability of findings. |
C H A P T E R 1 5 Integrating Technology and Pedagogy
The Ideas, the Shift, and the Targets
Jonathan Singer, University of South Carolina
Learning how to effectively maximize the power of technology in classrooms requires that preservice teachers have access to technology and curricular resources as well as opportunities for reffective practice in authentic contexts. This chapter illustrates the design of a technology-rich secondary science methods experience at the University of South Carolina. |
C H A P T E R 1 6 Student Technology Consultants
An Experiment in Collaboration
Dale Y. Hoskisson, Gary Thompson, and Dave Bass, Valley City State University
This chapter explains the basic principles of effective collaborations and how collaborations work in actual practice in a K–6 and university setting. It sets forth ways to prepare preservice teachers, inservice teachers, and university faculty to work together on collaborative projects that integrate technology into the classroom. The chapter also discusses specific benefits to all groups involved. |
C H A P T E R 1 7 An Evaluation Redesign
Chasing Illusions, Challenging Contexts, and Changing Directions
Nita Bryant, Virginia Commonwealth University
As PT3 was being initiated at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), Henrico County, Virginia, was providing all students in the district with personal computers. This chapter presents the convergence of these two efforts, highlighting a number of problems that undermined the best-laid plans of grant evaluators. This generated adesperate search for an innovative and workable evaluation: Plan B. The alternative that emerged involved preservice teachers in shadow studies of inservice teachers and facilitated greater connections between teacher preparation faculty, preservice students, K–12 teachers, and real-world classroom experiences. |
C H A P T E R 1 8 The Promise of E-Portfolios
Ownership and Authentic Assessment
Karen L. Murphy, Wheelock College; and Judith Johnson Richards, Graham and Parks Alternative Public School
This chapter recounts our efforts to incorporate electronic portfolios into the learning and teaching performance assessment process used for both urban K–8 students and preservice education students. E-portfolios allow students to demonstrate understanding through a wider, clearer window. The ability to present video, audio, and scanned artifacts as well as text entries offers our best hope for using the power of technology and insisting on the educational opportunities that will truly “leave no child behind.” |
C H A P T E R 1 9 PT3 @ an HBCU
The Xavier University of Louisiana Story
Elizabeth Moore Rhodes, Xavier University
Xavier, as a Historically Black College or University (HBCU), has experienced a cultural evolution that resulted in a quantum technological leap for a small liberal arts college. The resulting success stories are best told from the perspectives of three African Americans who were intricately involved in planning, implementation, and evaluation of our PT3 project: a male student in teacher education, a mid-career female teacher in a large urban school district, and a middle-aged university staff member. These compelling human stories will speak to the many diversity issues addressed in the digital divide. |
|
|
