The Global Learn Europe/North America 2012 Conference

November, 2012

Preparing and Training Teachers to Use Technology in their Classrooms: Educational Technology Course Design

Mariam M. Abdelmalak

Department of Curriculum & Instruction

College of Education

New Mexico State University

Las Cruces, New Mexico

United States

agenda• The Problem and a Recommended Solution

• A Learner-Centered Framework

• Implications of a Learner-Centered Framework for Educational Technology course in Teacher Education Programs and Professional Development Programs

The problem

• Over the past decade, expenditures on and access to computer-based technologies in USA schools have increased sharply (Market Data Retrieval, 2001)

• However, teachers’ use of computers in the classroom is limited (Cuban, 2001; Russell, Bebell, O’Dwyer, & O’Connor, 2003; Judson, 2006).

•

The problem

• Teachers’ lack of using technology in teaching could be, in part, a result of teachers’ lack of understanding of how technology can be integrated into regular classroom instructional practices (Cuban, 2001).

The solution

In response to this problem, several scholars have emphasized the need to provide pre- service and in-service teachers with better preparation on how to integrate technology into their teaching practices .

THE SOLUTION• This need puts demand on educational

technology courses in teacher education programs and professional development programs for technology use to provide pre-service and in- service teachers with the skills and technology knowledge they need to be able to appropriately utilize technology to perform a variety of teaching tasks.

But…

How to make an educational technology course more meaningful and ensure that students/teachers are learning to integrate technology in teaching and learning.

Learner-centered

A Learner-centered framework

• Orienting subject matter to student needs, interests, and experiences (McCombs, 2000; Ongeri, 2011; Dewey, 1938).

• Students’ control over their learning (Weimer, 2002; Cleveland-Innes & Emes, 2005; Yilmaz, 2009).

Orienting subject matter to students’ needs, interests, and experiences

• McCombs (2000): “learner-centered is the perspective that couples a focus on individual learners (their heredity, experiences, perspectives, backgrounds, talents, interests, capacities, and needs) with a focus on leaning” (p. 4).

Students’ control over their learning

• Learner-centered educators involve students in making decisions about their learning goals, the content of their courses (i.e., what they learn), the ways in which the course topics are learned (i.e., how they learn) and the ways in which students’ learning is evaluated (Yilmaz, 2009)

So what?

What Are Implications of the Learner-Centered Framework for Educational Technology course in Teacher Education Programs and Professional Development Programs?

Educational Technology Courses & Students’ Interests, needs and

Experiences• Educational technology courses based on

students’ priority concerns can have a lasting effect on the students’ confidence to use the technology in their future classroom (Wetzel, Foulger & Williams, 2009).

• Instructors in educational technology courses need to build on the knowledge, skills, and energy of students to achieve knowledge that is meant for their personal benefit in order to make educational technology course more meaningful and ensure that students are learning to integrate technology in their future teaching (Wetzel, Foulger & Williams, 2009).

Student control & educational technology courses

Fulton, Couros and Maeers (2000): one of the effective features of a technology-rich classroom environment is the interchangeable role of instructor and students where both the instructor and students share leadership.

“The teacher has primary responsibility for structuring the classroom environment, but students can also participate in the design” (Fulton et al., 2000, p. 320).

The technology-rich classroom environment should be “characterized as ‘freedom without license’ where students have freedom to make curriculum and learning, and are free to choose where and how they work within the context of a structured, respectful, collaborative learning community” (Fulton et al., 2000, p. 320).

Why is it important?

• Increased sense of responsibility

• Increased motivation in the learning process

• Engagement in the course

• Increased learning and excel in the course

conclusion

• Students’ needs and experiences should be a central consideration when choosing the content of educational technology courses

• Technology courses should be designed in a way that is shifted away from directing the students, towards engaging them, in a way that enables students to have control over their own learning.

references• Cleveland-Innes, M. & Emes, C. (2005). Principles of learner-centered curriculum:

Responding to the call for change in Higher Education. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, xxxv(4), 85-110.

• Cook, J. (1992). Negotiating the curriculum: Programming for learning. In G. Boomer, N. Lester, C. Onore & J. Cook (Eds.), Negotiating the curriculum: Educating for the 21 st century (pp. 15-31). London & New York: The Falmer Press

• Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused computers in the classroom: Computers in the classroom. United States of America: Harvard University Press

• Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

• Fulton, C., Couros, A., & Maeers, M. (2000). The impact of theory on technology use in the classroom. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference: Proceedings of SITE 200 (San Diego, CA).

• Judson, E. (2006). How teachers integrate technology and their beliefs about learning: Is there a connection? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 581-597.

• McCombs, B. (2000, September). Assessing the role of educational technology in the teaching and learning process: A learner-centered perspective. Paper presented at the Secretary’s Conference on Educational Technology: Measuring the Impacts and Shaping the Future, Washington, DC. Retrieved January 20, 2012, from http://tepserver.ucsd.edu/courses/tep203/fa04/a/articles/mccombs.pdf

references• Ongeri, J. (2011). Learner centered teaching potential for motivating students of economics:

Findings of an action research study. RHESL, 4(8), 27-40.

• Pettenati, M., Giuli, D., & Khaled, A. (2001). Information technology and staff development: Issues and problems related to new skills and competence acquisition. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(2), 153-170

• Russell, M., Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L., & O’Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for pre-service and in-service teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 279–310.

• Shelton, M., & Jones, M. (1996). Staff development that works! A tale of four T’s. NASSP Bulletin, 80(582), 99-

• Shor, I. (1996). When students have power : Negotiating authority in a critical pedagogy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

• Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, In

• Wetzel, K., Foulger, T., & Williams, K. (2009). The evolution of the required educational technology course. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(2), 67-7

• Yilmaz, K. (2009). Democracy through learner-centered education: A Turkish perspective. International Review of Education, 55(1), 21-37