You are here:

Technology Integration for Pre-Service Teachers: Evaluating the Team-Taught Cohort Model
ARTICLE

, , University of Maine Farmington, United States

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Volume 19, Number 1, ISSN 1059-7069 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

** Invited as a paper from SITE 2009 ** The Team-Taught Cohort Model for preparing pre-service teachers to use technology in their classrooms involves a “block” of courses in combination with a field experience in the second year of a four-year university program. Pre-service teachers are placed in cohort groups that participate in intensive coursework in curriculum, instruction, assessment, classroom management, and technology integration in balance with 18 full days of practicum experience. This model provides pre-service teachers with an authentic opportunity to integrate technology into a unit based on strong educational theory and current research, and an opportunity to spend quality time in a middle or high school classroom with a mentor teacher while being supported and coached by a team of university faculty members in a technology-rich environment. Four surveys were administered generating seven measures for each group of students. Effect Sizes measured using Cohen’s d ranged from 0.43 to 2.14 across the four semesters of students in the Team-Taught Cohort Model and from 0.24 to 1.12 across the two semesters of the comparison group in the Traditional Model. Results indicate that the Team-Taught Cohort Model is successful in increasing pre-service teachers’ competence and confidence in technology integration in the classroom.

Citation

Ward, G. & Overall, T. (2011). Technology Integration for Pre-Service Teachers: Evaluating the Team-Taught Cohort Model. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(1), 23-43. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved December 5, 2023 from .

© 2011 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: houghton-Mifflin.
  2. Christensen, R. (1997). Effect of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and their students. (doctoral dissertation, University of north Texas, 1997). Retrieved October 20, 2008, from http://courseweb.tac .unt.edu/rhondac/research/dissert/index.htm
  3. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2004). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, nJ: lawrence earlbaum associates.
  5. Dwyer, D. (1994). Apple classrooms of Tomorrow: What we’ve learned. Educational Leadership, 51(7), 4 – 10.
  6. Dodge, B. (1999). What is a WebQuest? retrieved October 20, 2008, from http://webquest.org/index.php
  7. Fullan, M. (2005). Professional learning communities writ large. In duFour, R., eaker, R. & DuFour R. (eds.), On common ground the power of professional learning communities (pp. 209-223). Bloomington, In: solution Tree. Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., and smith, B. L. (1990, spring). Learning communities: creating connections among students, faculty, and disciplines. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 41, 19-37.
  8. Griffin, D., & Christensen, R. (1999). Concerns-Based Adoption Model Levels of Use of an Innovation (CBAM-LOU). Adapted from hall, loucks, rutherford, & Newlove (1975). Denton, Texas: Institute for the Integration of Technology into Teaching and learning.
  9. Hall, L. (2006). Modeling technology integration for preservice teachers: a PT3 case study. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 6(4), 436-455.
  10. Hancock, R., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2007, June). Cross-validating measures of technology integration: A first step toward examining potential relationships between technology integration and student achievement. Paper presented at the national educational computing conference, atlanta, Ga. Knezek, G. A., christensen, R. W., Miyashita, K. T., & Ropp, M. M. (2000). Instruments for assessing educator progress in technology integration. Denton, Texas: Institute for the Integration of Technology into Teaching and learning.
  11. Maddux, C., & Johnson, L. (2005). Internet applications of type II uses of technology in education. New York: The haworth Press, Inc.
  12. Niess, M. L. (2008). Guiding preservice teachers in developing TPcK. In aacTe committee on Innovation and Technology (eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 223-250). New York: routledge.
  13. Ropp, M. M. (1999). Exploring individual characteristics associated with learning to use computers in pre-service teacher preparation. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 402-424.
  14. Russell, A. L. (1995). Stages in learning new technology: naive adult email users. Computers in Education, 25(4), 173-178.
  15. Sands, D. I., & Barker, H. B. (2004, Fall). Organized chaos: Modeling differentiated instruction for preservice teachers. Teaching & Learning, 19(1), 26-49. Seifert, K. & Mandzuk, D. (2004, February). How helpful are cohorts in teacher education. Paper presented at 25th Forum for ethnography in education, Philadelphia, Pa.
  16. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (expanded 2nd ed.). Alexandria, va: association for supervision and curriculum development.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.