Technology Scholars
Interview /Focus Group
September 13 & 14, 2000
in Teacher Education
Project Evaluation
By Mari Kemis
September 27, 2000
Technology Collaboratives for Simultaneous
Renewal in Teacher Education
Project Evaluation
Technology Scholars Interview /Focus Group
September 13 & 14, 2000
A faculty technology mentoring program has been an integral part of the teaching and learning environment in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction (C&I) at Iowa State University since 1991. A primary goal of the technology integration plan was to provide all faculty in the department with the tools they needed to make technology infusion a reality. A mentor helps the faculty member learn computer programs in their content area and assists in the design of technology instructional materials for the faculty member’s courses.
Several of the TechCo project’s goals (Goals
1 through 5) are addressed through the technology scholars’ program by providing teacher educators
with the necessary support and time to learn how to use technology and prepare
them to design and integrate technology applications in their classrooms. Beginning in the Summer of 2000, six
faculty members in C&I applied for and were named as technology
scholars. They received a computer
and summer salary (and accompanying course release) to study and work
one-on-one with a technology mentor to begin developing materials and ideas for
incorporating technology into courses that the TechCo students would take
within the next year. Throughout
the summer, they also participated in a series of weekly meetings and sharing
activities with project personnel and each other.
TechCo
evaluators conducted a focus group with four technology scholars on September
14, 2000 and an interview with one scholar on September 13, 2000. [The sixth faculty member participating
in the summer activities resigned and left Iowa State University prior to the
start of Fall Semester 2000.] The
scholars discussed topics related to their motivations for becoming a
technology scholar, whether they considered themselves technology-using
educators, the effectiveness of the process and the summer activities in
helping them plan to incorporate technology into their courses, their plans for
integrating technology into their courses this fall, their needs for continuing
to learn about technology integration, and their suggestions for encouraging
further faculty interest in using technology in the classroom.
Motivations for participating. Participating in the Technology Scholar
program was attractive to these faculty members. They noted the value of a new and more advanced and powerful
computer, the release time and summer salary to pursue ways to integrate
technology into the methods course
[and that] made it possible
for me to really dig deep. . . and concentrate, a mentor who provided support and focus for
specific topics, and sharing with other colleagues who are also learning and
experimenting.
We
were being offered resources to do what we will probably be expected to do on
our own down the road. It seem[ed] like an offer hard to refuse.
[Before]
I had an ancient, slow [computer]
that I wanted to forget. It has made a huge difference [when] the pages snap and it doesn’t boot
me out.
The
money said this was an obligation.
You need to. . . make this important and I did. It gave me time to review software that
I ask my students to use in class, but. . . really didn’t know [about].
It encouraged me to get out on the Internet and look at web addresses. .
. . As a result, I have compiled
some very valuable websites for my students to use.
It
provided a new opportunity to work with [a colleague]. . . who’s two or three squares ahead of me.
I
was exposed to things I hadn’t even considered. . .The curriculum focus
is [beneficial].
One
of the five considered herself to be a technology-using educator; the other
four labeled themselves as “emerging” technology-using
educators. Three of the five had
worked previously with a mentor.
One scholar had considerable experience in integrating technology into
her courses. She noted her general
interest in using technology in her courses and listening to others, and
self-study led her to using the web, maintaining a server, and encouraging
students to use on-line simulations, multimedia, on-line presentations, power
point, and email. In recent years,
pedagogical considerations have taken on a greater importance in how she uses
technology.
The
other scholars reported a quite different situation. Three of them talked about being so uncomfortable that they didn’t
even consider using
technology. The fourth said, I
started using things I knew were safe.
I started maybe three or four semesters ago with WebCT in a very, very
unsophisticated fashion because of [the
encouragement of] my tech mentor. They were unsure how to approach the
challenge of integrating technology into their courses.
Effectiveness of the summer process and
activities. The scholars
agreed that the summer activities were fun and enjoyable and that they learned
from listening and sharing with each other. The mentor provided invaluable support and resources.
[We]
have offices that are adjacent to one another. . . . when we were reviewing
software and CD-ROMS, we were back and forth. . . . There was a lot of that
informal, spontaneous, “Hey, take a look at this. Let me show you what I found.”. .
. . That kind of sharing is really important.
I
would have never known about WebQuest if it hadn’t been for coming to the
meetings and hearing other people share their knowledge. I think the meetings were very
important.
I’ve
done a lot of self-motivated search.
It has been an eye opener to me in terms of the volume of material that
is out there.
[After]
reviewing software that is available in [our department]. . . we found some pretty significant holes. We were able to . . . fill those holes
with PT3 money!
Without
mentors, I would be doing hardly anything with technology. That has made all the difference.
Plans for integrating technology in courses
this semester. All of the
scholars talked about being interested in integrating technology this semester,
but most did not have enough time to fully develop their plans. Several said that they are introducing
websites or other opportunities to use technology, but generally were not
making required assignments, but at the same time, recognizing the value of
requiring students to use technology in the classroom. One scholar indicated several
activities, such as bulletin boards and on-line presentations, access to
digitized materials online, and a unit on technology critique in education,
would be incorporated into her course.
Further, they are looking forward to the broader options available in
the wired classroom with its access to the Internet, the high-speed line,
advanced projection equipment, and Smartboards.
I
am exploring and thinking about ways to integrate technology into the first of
our required reading courses. . .
Officially, that won’t be until next fall [2001].
What I have been doing this semester. . . is to provide my students with
a website or two that contains additional information. . . or is a site for an
instructional activity. I am
just introducing these websites and trying to develop an awareness among my
students that this can be a resource.
Next semester [Spring
2001], I hope to do something more concrete. . .to treat it as a pilot for.
. .next fall. . . .I haven’t
required it,[but] I get a
sense [the students]
appreciate that they’re getting this information.
I
took my graduate class down to the computer lab this week. I am so proud of myself. I have never done that. . . . It was a
baby step, but I thought it was exciting.
I
presented [WebQuest} as an
option for a final project in my graduate class. I don’t know enough about it to really be their
teacher. We would have to work
through it together.
One
of the early projects [for
C&I 378] that the students are required to do is . . . create a product
that will introduce themselves to the classroom that they have a field
experience in. That assignment
suggests a tech option. . . Not
one student involved technology [in
their project]. . . The
students do not gravitate towards that without [technology applications] being required.
As
a faculty, we can model, explore, and be enthusiastic. We are at a point that we. . . [need to demand] that students use [technology]. It’s not really a part of their fabric.
When[the wired classroom] is up and running, I [will] have a lot more options available to
me.
Needs for continuing to learn about technology. Time remains the key issue in
continuing to learn about integrating technology into courses. Formalized follow-up, including
additional released time to make detailed course plans, as well as meetings to
share experiences and focus on specific topics, were suggested. Making hardware such as scanners and
color printers available, being able to offer more class time in the computer
labs, providing technical information about legal issues such as parental
permission and copyright, and offering training sessions on specific topics
(like WebCT) would be appreciated as well. They see the wired classroom as an important opportunity to
enhance their use of technology.
Just
as important as it was to have this salary block time last semester to get
started, I see an equal . . . need for a salary block of time this next summer
to really put together the technology integrated version of my course. I am thinking about it all of the time
and I am not going to wait until this summer [to start]. . . but I think I am going to need that block of time
where I don’t have to concern myself with anything else and I can get
that course planned well.
My
students . . . really need to go down [to
the labs] a couple more times.
The labs aren’t always accessible. . . If I don’t want it a
group project, there needs to be some lab time. Then, I have to decide to give up the content time to do the
technology. There are some real
curriculum issues . . . involved.
Encouraging other faculty. These faculty members realize that they
are not the only ones using technology or learning about integrating technology
into their ISU courses. They
talked about other faculty in the department who are using technology in their
courses, but are not involved directly with TechCo. They believe that these faculty members have a lot of offer
through mutual sharing of experiences and that TechCo could facilitate
discussions with them. Additionally,
the scholars suggested that colleagues with similar interests may find a
natural connection to explore experimenting with technology. They disagreed about the value of
assigning “tech buddies,” however. One was willing to make a commitment to a buddy, while
others prefer to choose their own technology partner. Another suggestion was visiting the K-12 partner schools or
having more information about how technology is integrated in the K-12
curriculum. Finally, the
incentives, such as summer salary and a mentor, were mentioned as important
factors in encouraging other faculty.
You
need to get a buddy. . . to try new projects. Maybe that support comes even if it isn’t one-on-one,
but [through] those interested
in [a specific topic].
Wouldn’t
it be great to have sessions with other [faculty members who are incorporating technology in their courses]? . . . it would expand our thinking if
we knew what they were doing in [their
class]rooms.
Overall, the technology scholars expressed great interest in continuing to participate in this program. The technology scholars program allowed for dedicated time to learn about and study new technologies in depth, to experiment with these technologies in their classrooms, and to share experiences with others. While most of them continue to work together informally, follow-up through TechCo, including additional dedicated time and opportunity to share and learn from others, is necessary and wanted by the scholars as they continue to integrate technology into their courses, benefiting both TechCo and other students in the teacher education program at ISU. The following comments sum it up:
We
are committed to having options for students. My concentration, at least for now, has gone toward online
activities for children. First,
considering it merits use. . . how do you incorporate it into what you are
already doing? Where does it fit?
{An]
area I would like to pursue is better use of digital cameras.
I
have had mentors off and on [since
1994], but I have grown so much in the past few months, it is
unbelievable. It is like I have
turned a very, very important corner.
It began with the [summer]
session and seeing possibilities, hearing from [the other scholars], seeing WebCT, and seeing
the Internet.