You are here:

Modeling Technology Integration for Preservice Teachers: A PT3 Case Study
Article

, Washington State University, United States

CITE Journal Volume 6, Number 4, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

This case study describes the outcomes of 4 years of professional development funded by a PT3 grant. Participants included general education university faculty members, teacher education faculty members, school administrators, and K-12 teachers. All professional development activities were based on the National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS-T). Findings show that all participants modeled Standards 1-5 of NETS-T. Discussion includes the absence of modeling of Standard 6 and levels of cognitive skills required by students to engage in technology integration activities. Based on this study, it is recommended that professional development in the area of technology integration for university faculty members and for K-12 teachers should stress uses of software and hardware for analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of information and concepts. Understanding the stages of adoption and their relationships to cognitive skills may help instructors reflect on personal practice and move through the stages more quickly. Special attention should be paid to NETS-T, Standard 6, to ensure understandings of ways in which specific pieces of software and specific pedagogical practices can empower and disempower groups of diverse learners.

Citation

Hall, L. (2006). Modeling Technology Integration for Preservice Teachers: A PT3 Case Study. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 6(4), 436-455. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Baker, E.L., Gearhart, M., & Herman, J.L. (1993). The Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow: The UCLA evaluation studies. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 378 219)
  2. Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1956).Taxonomy of educational objectives; the classification of
  3. Bruder, I., Buchsbaum, H., Hill, M., & Orlando, L. (1992). School reform: Why we need technology to get there. Electronic Learning, 11(8), 22-28.
  4. Campoy, R. (1992). The role of technology in the school reform movement. Educational Technology, 32(8), 17-22.
  5. Carlson, R.D., & Gooden, J.S. (1999). Mentoring preservice teachers for technology
  6. Collins, A. (1991). The role of computer technology in restructuring schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(1), 28-36.
  7. Cradler, J., Freeman, M., Cradler, R., & McNabb, M. (2002). Research implications for preparing teachers to use technology. Learning and Leading with Technology, 30(1), 5054.
  8. Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  9. Denton, J., Davis, T., Strader, A., Clark, F., & Jolly, D. (2003, February). Technology professional development of teacher education faculty by net generation mentors. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, San Antonio, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED477711)
  10. Dwyer, D.C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J.H. (1991). Changes in teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-rich classrooms. Educational Leadership, 48(8), 45-52.
  11. Feist, L. (2003). Removing barriers to professional development. T.H.E. Journal, 30(11), 30, 32, 34, 36.
  12. Graves, S.B., & Kelly, M.A. (2002, June). Faculty technology professional development: A pedagogical and curricular reform model. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Educational Computing Conference, San Antonio, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED475931)
  13. Hord, S., Rutherford, W., Huling-Austin, L., & Hall, G. (1987). Taking charge of change. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 453
  14. Howland, J., & Wedman, J. (2004). A process model for faculty development: Individualizing technology learning. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(2), 239-263.
  15. International Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National educational technology standards for students: Connecting curriculum and technology. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education. Also available from http://cnets.iste.org/students/s_stands.html
  16. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational technology standards for teachers: Preparing teachers to use technology. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education. Also available from http://cnets.iste.org/teachers/t_book.html
  17. International Society for Technology in Education. (2005). National educational technology standards. Retrieved February 1, 2006, from http://cnets.iste.org/.
  18. Israel, M.S., & Kasper, B.B. (2004). Reframing leadership to create change. The Educational Forum, 69(1), 16-26.
  19. Kahn, J., & Pred, R. (2001). Evaluation of a faculty development model for technology use in higher education for late adopters. Computers in the Schools, 18(4), 127–150.
  20. Margerum-Leys, J., & Marx, R.W. (2004). The nature and sharing of teacher knowledge of technology in a student teacher/mentor teacher pair. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(5), 421-437.
  21. McCoy, L.P. (2000). Computer skills and instructional activities of student teachers and cooperating teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
  22. Murphy, K.L., Richards, J., Lewis, C., & Carman, E. (2005). Strengthening educational technology in K-8 urban schools and in preservice teacher education: A practitionerfaculty collaborative process. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1), 12539.
  23. Newman, D. (1992). Technology as support for school structure and school restructuring. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(4), 308-315.
  24. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  25. Popham, J.A., & Rocque, R. (2004). Faculty-as-students: Teacher education faculty meaningfully engaged in a preservice technology course. Computers in the Schools, 21(1/2), 115-26.
  26. Rosaen, C.L., Hobson, S., & Khan, G. (2003). Making connections: Collaborative approaches to preparing today’s and tomorrow’s teachers to use technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(2), 281-306.
  27. Shank, G.D. (2002). Qualitative research: A personal skills approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
  28. Sheingold, K., & Hadley, M. (1990). Accomplished teachers: Integrating computers into classroom practice. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 322 900)
  29. Slavit, D., Sawyer, R., & Curley, J. (2003). Filling your PLATE: A professional development model for teaching with technology. TechTrends, 47(4), 35-38.
  30. Stake, R.E. (2000). Case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 435-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  31. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  32. Technology Standards for School Administrators Collaborative. (2001). Technology standards for school administrators. Retrieved October 2, 2006, from http://cnets.iste.org/tssa/pdf/tssa.pdf
  33. Wedman, J., & Diggs, L. (2001). Identifying barriers to technology-enhanced learning environments in teacher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(4), 421-430.
  34. Wizer, D.R., & McPherson, S.J. (2005). The administrator’s role: Strategies for fostering staff development. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39(5), 14-17.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. iPads as an Approach for Teaching Technology Integration for Secondary Preservice Teachers

    Theresa Overall & Grace Ward, University of Maine Farmington, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (Mar 02, 2015) pp. 3358–3363

  2. Technology Integration for Preservice Mathematics Teacher: A Time-Series Study

    Grace Ward & Theresa Overall, University of Maine Farmington, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (Mar 25, 2013) pp. 4878–4884

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

    Grace Ward & Theresa Overall, University of Maine Farmington, United States

    Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Vol. 19, No. 1 (January 2011) pp. 23–43

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.