You are here:

Inquiry and Information Technology Integration: Cognitive Apprenticeship Learning Environment Model (CALEM)
PROCEEDINGS

, , , , Wichita State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-47-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Full Text

Abstract

Abstract: The CALEM is a dynamic evolving, team-driven model, integrating state-of-the-art information technology cognitive tools, and inquiry into teaching, learning, and research of teachers and teacher educators. The model stems from numerous collaborative experiences: (a) teaching several courses that integrate technology into the core curriculum; (b) an exemplary professional development program in which teachers had an opportunity to develop teaching modules for their classrooms, supported by an Eisenhower grant; and (c) preservice teachers' global learning experiences with students from a similar class at an overseas university of technology, supported by a local Global Learning grant. This paper will present the model and potential impact of its dimensions on integration of inquiry and information technology into core curricula.

Citation

Yeotis, C., Rimmington, G., Koert, D. & Alagic, M. (2003). Inquiry and Information Technology Integration: Cognitive Apprenticeship Learning Environment Model (CALEM). In C. Crawford, N. Davis, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2003--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 826-833). Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved April 20, 2020 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Alagic, M., Hutchinson, J. & Kreihbel, M. (2001). TM MATH: Teacher Made (Designed) Mathematics. Dwight D. Eisenhower Professional Development Program. Kansas Board of Regents.
  2. Alagic, M. (2002). Participatory Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teachers Learning Mathematics in the Technology-based Environment. International Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education (SITE), Nashville. Tennessee.
  3. Alagic, M., Gibson, K & Haack, C (2002). Learning to Teach Elementary Mathematics and Science: A Global Learning Dimension. International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE 2002). Auckland, New Zealand.
  4. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. New York: Basic Books Inc.
  5. Hannafin. M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). “Open Learning Environments: foundations, Methods, and Models”. In Reigeluth,
  6. C.M. (1999). Instructional Design Theories and Models Volume II. A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hecker, D.E. (November 2001). Occupational Employment Projections to 2001. Monthly Labor Review, pp.57-58.
  7. Jonassen, D.H. & Reeves, T.C. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 693-719). New York: Macmillan.
  8. James, D.W., Jurich, S. & Estes, S. (2001). Raising Minority Academic Achievement, A Compendium of Education Programs and Practices. Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum.
  9. Karplus, R., & Thier.H. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand McNally.
  10. Marek, E.A., & Cavallo, A.L. (1997).The learning cycle: Elementary school science and beyond. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  11. Margolis, J. & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. National Center for Education Statistics (September 2000). Teachers’ tools for the 21st century: A report on Teachers’ use of technology. Washington, DC: Author.
  12. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM, Inc.
  13. National Research Council. (1996). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  14. National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, and school (Rev. Ed.).Washington, DC: Author. National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences. (1999). Being Fluent with Information Technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  15. Perkins, D. (1993). Teaching for understanding. American Educator: The Professional Journal of the American Federation of Teachers. 17(3). 28-35.
  16. Reigeluth, C.M. (1999). Instructional Design Theories and Models Volume II. A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  17. Rimmington, G.M. (2002). Diversity and global learning for world peace. Foreword. J. Critical Inquiry into Curriculum and Instruction. 3(3), 4-6.
  18. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1988). “Problem solving in context(s)”. In: “The teaching and assessing of mathematical problem solving” Eds: R.I. Charles& E.A. Silver (Vol. 3, pp. 82-92). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & National Council for Teachers of
  19. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
  20. Siginer, D., Alagic, M., Chaudhuri, J., Krishnan, K, Rimmington, G.M. (2002). I-SEE Paradigm for Multi-Disciplinary Learning and Collaboration. NSF Division of engineering education and centers.
  21. Smith, M.S. (2001). Practice-based professional development for teachers of mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Acknowledgements

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.

Also Read

Related Collections