Maryland Technology Grant "Our goal is to ensure that all

Implementing the Maryland Teacher Technology

Standards

Dr. Louise A. Tanney, MD State Department of EducationDr. Stan Bennett, University of Maryland

Dr. Marcia Cushall, Frostburg State University

SITE 2003 ConferenceMarch 25, 2002

Albuquerque, NM

Maryland Technology Grant

“Our goal is to ensure that all Maryland teacher candidates are proficient in integrating technology in the classroom for teaching and learning.”

Program Development and Accountability in Maryland

MTTS incorporated into policy:

• MD Redesign of Teacher Education (1996)– Improve teacher education; link preparation of

teachers to Maryland K-12 schools

• IHEs use either Maryland’s Essential Dimensions of Teaching or the INTASC Standards (both include MTTS)

• HEA Title II Institutional Performance Criteria (MTTS is one of the criteria)

MD Technology Consortium

Membership:• Two - and four - year colleges• Local school systems• Maryland Higher Education

Commission• Maryland State Department of Education• Human Resources Research Organization

(HumRRO)• Mid-Atlantic Regional Technology in

Education Consortium (MAR-TEC)

Project Goal 1:

Align higher education curriculum and practicum experiences with the Maryland Teacher Technology Standards.

Project Goal 2:

Create consistent and credible performance assessments to measure technology proficiencies.

Project Goal 3:

Incorporate Maryland Teacher Technology Standards into teacher candidate electronic portfolios.

Maryland Teacher Technology Standards

I. Information Access, Evaluation, Processing and Application

II. CommunicationIII. Legal, Social, and Ethical IssuesIV. Assessment for Administration and

InstructionV. Integrating Technology into the Curriculum

and InstructionVI. Assistive TechnologyVII. Professional Growth

Model Performance Assessments

For institutions to:• Ensure all teacher candidates perform at proficiency levels

• Adopt or adapt with other program requirements

Performance Assessment Materials

CD includes:

• Letter of introduction

• Maryland Teacher Technology Standards

• Task summaries

• Performance assessment tasks and scoring tools

• Glossary of terms

• List of Consortium members

Step One

• Establish a committee to plan and oversee the implementation of the Maryland Teacher Technology Standards.

• Redesign of Teacher Education

• Title II reporting criteria

• Connection to the K-12 community – State Technology Plan

Step Two

• Survey faculty to identify where the Maryland Teacher Technology Standards are taught and assessed in your program.

Developing a Survey

• Original online survey developed at Salisbury University (Regina Royer)

• University of Maryland Teaching with Technology Database (see handout)

Step Three

• Plan faculty development on the integration of the Maryland Teacher Technology Standards.University of Maryland, College Park

Faculty Development

• Building Learning with Technology (BLT):√ Re-thinking teaching and learning√ Building technology-enriched units for courses in which future teachers enroll √ Student-faculty mentoring√ Learning to use software as needed√ Planning how to meet the Maryland Teacher Technology Standards

Key BLT Components

√ Faculty-student design teams create units√ Template for building units using the 5 E’s:

Engagement, Exploration, Explanation Extension and Evaluation

√ January and July Design Institutes√ Monthly follow-up team meetings√ Implementation and revision of units√ Sharing units with other faculty/students

For more information: http://www.education.umd.edu/blt

Step Four

• Plan a timeline for integrating the Maryland Teacher Technology Standards and performance assessment tasks into the curricula.

• Frostburg State University

Timeline

• Intersession 2001

• Spring 2001

• Summer 2001

• Summer 2001

• Fall 2001

Determine where three of the assessments will be tested

Pilot the assessments

Review the results of the pilot and re-examine where skills are taught and assessments are completed

Work with other faculty to place assessments in courses

Conduct the three assessments

Timeline• Intersession

2002

• Spring 2002

• Summer 2002

• Summer 2002

• Fall 2002

• Fall 2002

Review results of assessments (scores, administration, and evaluation)

Pilot 3 more assessments

Review the results of the pilot and re-examine where skills are taught, assessments completed and by whom

Work with other faculty to place assessments in courses

Conduct six assessments

Design candidate / MTTS database

Timeline

• Intersession 2003

• Spring 2003

• Spring 2003

• Spring 2003

• Summer 2003

Review results of assessments (scores, administration, and evaluation)

Conduct six assessments

Work with other faculty to place final assessment in courses

Begin to enter candidate / MTTS data in database

Review the results of the assessments and re-examine where skills are taught, assessments completed and by whom

Timeline

• Fall 2003

• Fall 2003

• Fall 2003

• Intersession 2004

Conduct all assessments

Collect NCATE Composite Scoring Forms for all candidates

Update candidate / MTTS database

Review results of assessments (scores, administration, and evaluation) and make needed adjustments

Spring/Fall

Placement of Assessments in Elementary/Early Childhood Program

Assessments

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Placements

Ed Tech Lab I

Ed Tech Labs I & II

Ed Tech Lab I

Ed Tech Lab III

Ed Tech Lab III (Internship I) & Internship II

Special Education

Internship II Leadership Seminar

Step Five

• Evaluate, reflect

and revise your implementation plan.

• Frostburg State University

Evaluate, Reflect, Revise

• Skills– Time to teach skills

– Where skills are taught• Technology Courses• Content / methods courses

Evaluate, Reflect, Revise

• Assessments– Where are they evaluated

• Technology Courses• Content / methods courses• Internships

– Who evaluates the assessments• Course instructors• K-12 technology coordinators / tech reps• Peer groups

– Time needed to evaluate assessments• Method of evaluation• Persons completing evaluations

Evaluate, Reflect, Revise

• Input from K-12 partners_ Technology Advisory Council_ Tech Reps

• Revise implementation plan– Move placement of skills attainment and

assessments– Change manner in which assessments are

evaluated and by whom– Adjust implementation plan

Step Six

• Collect evidence for state program approval or joint NCATE accreditation/Maryland approval.

• Frostburg State University

Collect Evidence

• Statistical data for each performance assessment

• Samples of products showing range in performance

• Database of students/assessments

• Showcase in portfolios

Step Seven

• Use data/evidence to revise, improve and sustain your program

• Frostburg State University

Use of Data

• Review performance of students– Adequate time spent on skills attainment– Adequate explanation of assessments– Adequate practice examples integrated

into courses

• Review data collection process and media

Common Strategies for Success:

• Leadership with vision and

commitment

• Faculty support

• Content integrated with

technology

• Collaborate with K - 12 partners

For For more information. . .

www.smcm.edu/msde-pt3