You are here:

Theoretical Foundations for Design of Online Tools for a Professional Learning Community for Novice Science Teachers
PROCEEDINGS

, , , Texas A&M University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Charleston, SC, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-67-9 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Full Text

Abstract

Professional Learning Community Model for Entry into Teaching Science (PLC-METS) is an iterative model and partnership between a large research university and two school districts in a large metropolitan area in south east Texas that is focused on developing a professional learning community that increases the retention and quality of middle school science teachers. To support this community the online tools have shifted from an online managerial portal in the initial model that organized documents, websites, and asynchronous discussions to the use of a wiki, blogs, iGoogle, listservs, and a private social network to support the “just in time, just for me” needs of novice teachers. We propose that effective virtual mentoring where teachers can exchange information and resources, solve problems, and construct new knowledge both with their peers and more established professionals at any time they need will likely improve the quality of instruction performed by the novice teachers involved in the professional development program.

Citation

Miller, H., Kim, H.J. & Herbert, B. (2009). Theoretical Foundations for Design of Online Tools for a Professional Learning Community for Novice Science Teachers. In I. Gibson, R. Weber, K. McFerrin, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2009--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2015-2018). Charleston, SC, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 12, 2019 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, R. (1996). The Study of Curriculum Reform, downloaded Nov 2008 from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/SER/CurricReform.
  2. Bankicky, L.A. & Foss, H.K. (1999). Quality Matters! Quality Teachers, Quality Teaching, Delaware Education Research and Development Center, University of Delaware.
  3. Barab, S.A., Kling, R. & Gray, J.H. (2004). Introduction: Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning in: S.A. Barab, R. Kling & J.H. Gray (Eds) Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press).
  4. Becker, H.J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning, and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51), 2-32.
  5. Becker, H.J. (2001, April). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
  6. Darling-Hammond, L. & Rustique-Forrester, E. (1997). Investing in Quality Teaching: State-Level Strategies, Education Commission of the States, Perspective.
  7. Gibson, S. & Oberg, D. (2004). Visions and realities of Internet use in schools: Canadian perspectives. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 569-585.
  8. Gomez, L.M., Sherin, M.G., Griesdorn, J., & Finn, L.E. (2008). Creating Social Relationships: The Role of Technology in Preservice Teacher Preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(2), 117-131.
  9. Haycock, K. (1998).Good Teaching Matters… A Lot, Thinking K-16, The Education Trust P. 1-14.
  10. Hewitt, J. & Scardamalia, M. (1999). Design principles for distributed knowledge building processes, Educational Psychology Review, 10(1), 75-96.
  11. Honey, M. & McMillan, K. (1996). Case studies of K-12 educators’ use of the Internet: Exploring the relationship between metaphor and practice. Center for Children& Technology CCT Reports Issue No. 5. Retrieved October 15, 2008 from http://tinyurl.com/yqb3fs.
  12. Lin, F., Lin, S., & Huang, T. (2008). Knowledge sharing and creation in a teachers’ professional virtual community. Computers& Education, 50, 742-756.
  13. Ronnkvist, A., Dexter, S., & Anderson, R. (2000). Technology support: Its depth, breadth, and impact on America’s schools: Teaching, learning, and computing 1998 survey, Report# 5. Irvine: Center for Research on Information, Technology, and Organizations at University of California, Irvine.
  14. Russell, M., Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L., & O’Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and in-service teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 297-310.
  15. Sanders, W. & Rivers, J. (1996). Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Students Academic Achievement, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
  16. Schlager, M.S. & Fusco, J. (2004). Teacher professional development, technology, and communities of practice: Are we putting the cart before the horse?, in: S.A. Barab, R. Kling & J.H. Gray (Eds) Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press).
  17. Tarmizi,H., Vreede, G.J., & Zirgurs, I. (2006). Identifying Challenges for Facilitation in Communities of Practice. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Science. 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

Also Read

Related Collections