I was recently browsing through an eSchool News online article with the title “Experts: Ed tech must change its message.”
The article is about the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN) conference in San Francisco March 28, where past CoSN board chairs participated in a roundtable discussion about the need to advocate more forcefully for change in higher education.
This is the question under discussion:
Given the needs of today's learners, as well as the current context of technology in most school districts, what are the most important ed-tech leadership issues that are not receiving attention?
Two themes are elucidated in the article – the need for a new vocabulary for discussing educational technology with various stakeholders, and the need to overhaul the teacher education process.
While I agree that a new vocabulary and an overhaul of teacher education programs are popular, hot-button issues, perhaps they are actually one in the same. Allow me to explain….
A relatively recent study of teacher education programs reveals the following features of a successful program (Darling-Hammond, 1999):
- A shared vision of good teaching that is consistent in courses and clinical work;
- Well-defined standards of practice and performance that are used to guide the design and assessment of course work and clinical work;
- A common core curriculum grounded in substantial knowledge of development, learning, and subject matter pedagogy, taught in the context of practice;
- Extended clinical experiences (at least thirty weeks) that reflect the programs vision of good teaching, are interwoven with course work, and are carefully mentored;
- Strong relationships, based on common knowledge and beliefs, between universities and reform-minded schools; and
- Extensive use of case study methods, teacher research, performance assessments, and portfolio examinations that relate teachers’ learning to classroom practice.
Now, that’s quite a thorough and articulate list. What is needed in teacher education is clearly understood. Where the disconnect occurs is transferring this theory into practice (an age old problem in the field of education, for sure).
Will a new vocabulary make the transfer easier?
A new vocabulary might allow us to create new metaphors for thinking about the integration of technology into classrooms, but the trouble begins when we attempt to enact these new/old concepts.
While educational technology has gained a foothold in many private and public higher education institutions, it often resides as a curricular add-ons as opposed to fundamental building blocks. Most of the professors at my uni do not use technology aside from email and powerpoint presentations. In the teacher education program, one educational technology course is required, a fundamentals class, that is most often taught by advanced graduate students. While these graduate students do an outstanding job of activity-based instruction, the content of students’ other pedagogical course work is not directly tied to their use technology. So the buck stops there.
The reality is, the teacher educators I work with who are reluctant to use technology in their curriculum do not use it for several of the following reasons: 1) they don’t want to learn about it; 2) they don’t see any value in its use; 3) it’s not the way they learned; 4) its considered just another educational “fad;” and 5) they don’t know any body else using it effectively. 
Another excuse I’ve heard from teacher educators is the fact that most schools offer limited technological access and resources, so if they use IT to teach with, then students will go into the world trained inappropriately with skills they will not be able to employ.
Hmmm… a major disconnect indeed.
While many kids’ social life hinges on digital social networks, many schools have not figured out how to tap into their power. Instead students code switch, i.e., they use their MySpace, Facebook, and del.icio.us accounts for their personal life and drop them in their school life. Given that we are capable of multiple ways of thinking, believing, acting, perceiving, and evaluating, this code switching sometimes strikes me as a better alternative to having ill-prepared educators require us to use technology in an overly prescriptive, uncreative fashion.
As of today, getting educational technology written into the curriculum in a meaningful way will require significant effort. A core set of curricular frameworks for teacher education is just now being tested and evaluated (see Darling-Hammond & Bransford’s Preparing Teachers for a Changing World, 2005) The good news is, because teacher education experts are still hammering out such frameworks, there’s room to expand and add technology appropriately into the core requirements. But here again is where things get tricky and perhaps a better might vocabulary come into play. Clearly, we need to articulate what we want kids/adults to do with technology. 
For example, do we want kids to engage in multicultural experiences that raise their awareness and sensitivity to other cultures and societies? If so, then we must write curricular frameworks that have students engaging meaningfully with students from around the globe via the Internet (like the flat classroom project).
Obviously we want to steer away from the use of any one particular piece of software, yet we can advocate the use of technologies such as weblogs, wikis, virtual worlds, simulations, etc. as they provide a means to enhance our ability to connect, think, experiment, care, and share.
Transforming schools, classrooms, and teacher education programs is a momentous task. I am convinced that eager, well-educated, committed educators can and will make a difference. We already have the knowledge, skill, and technology to transform students’ lives. Perhaps what we require is the collective will do to so.
Reference:
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Educating teachers for the next century: Rethinking practice and policy. In G.A. Griffin (ed.), The education of teachers (pp. 221-256). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Keywords: caring, change, connections, CoSN, curriculum, educational technology, experience, frameworks, leadership, learning, life long learning, Linda Darling-Hammond, new story, pedagogy, portfolios, school reform, skills, social media, social networks, social software, teacher education, teacher training, teaching, transfer, vision
Comments
In our ict_pd cluster schools in NZ we get our best response from the "grudging compliant about e-learning" when we sit in on teacher planning.
When teachers are planning learning experiences across all different levels of student learning outcomes - we use SOLO taxonomy (unistructural/ multistructural/ relational and extended abstract) - it is natural to ask for example "how might ict enhance/ betray the conditions for relational thinking?" Show them something like Grokker and you'd have to fight them to stop them using this with their kids. It has made them look at blogs/ wikis/ software/ podcasting etc in a new way
They act like someone just turned on the light when we talk about ICT in this context - teachers all over want to make a difference - they understand learning outcomes and they plan for them, if they can see clearly how ict will make the learning outcomes stronger they use it.
This is a fascinating article and thank you for raising the discussion.
We are working on some staff development planning at my campus and trying to develop a more effective model--a group of teachers and other staff has been empowered to work on this, so I want us to consider some of the points you made above regarding teacher education in general, because many of those will apply to what we are doing.
I think the question what do we want students to do with the technology is significant, but I also think we want them to do everything. I want it to be as natural to use technology as it is driving your own car. It just should be the obvious thing to achieve the outcomes.
Your comment about teacher ed programs using the excuse that when those teachers get to a school, it won't have those tools to use anyway--really struck home. When I went through my library certification, I had been in secondary and wanted to continue in secondary, so I was sent to an elementary school with no computers and with check out cards. Because--the same reason--that is the kind of school I'd probably end up working in. In reality my first job 16 years ago was in a school that was implementing two computer labs in their library, had an automated library system, and handled all sorts of technology equipment. Consequently, I had to learn everything on the job. My point being, we can't know what we are preparing students for--whether they be students in college studying education or students in high school. We can't even begin to define the world they may face, but we need to share with them the best tools and practices available so they will be equipped to think about the possibilities.
I know many educators who are willing to learn, but I agree with Kelly that time is a tremendous issue in k-12 education right now. Surely there are innovative ways to work on that issue--hiring staff to help grade papers or hook up equipment and xerox papers like colleges do so that teachers can spend time in curricular pursuits and planning? I saw one school that had secretaries for departments that teachers shared.
Are teachers presenting at conferences? What I mean is, are k-12 teachers presenting at conferences for higher ed? Higher ed presents at k-12 conferences. Are teachers presenting at conferences for principals? (I'm trying it for the first time this year). Maybe we need more opportunities to "mix it up" among the levels to promote a better understanding.
It seems that most of the education professors don't visit campuses very often, and most teachers don't visit college classrooms very often. Maybe it's time for some cross-conversation?
Sorry for such a long post--this really struck a spark with me.
Thanks for the ideas.
Christopher, thank you for posting your discussion.
You really hit home when you listed the five reasons why teachers won’t use technology in their classrooms. In my district I have heard these same reasons over and over again. These comments are made by my veteran teachers along with those right out of college. But in fairness up to about three years ago, we too offered limited technological access and resources. Apparently there was very little enthusiasm and commitment of the part of the administration and BOE regarding the purchase of new technologies and staff development.
It has been a slow process, but today we have a commitment from the administration and BOE to provide financial resources for both hardware and software. We have assembly a core of staff who are now responsible for provide staff development, and researching the use of newest technologies both software and hardware. Along with researching new technologies, they are responsible for developing avenues to implement the new technologies into our curriculum. Great things are starting to happen!!
A couple of questions re this interesting but now almost thirty year old conversation about using computers and related technologies in schools:
why have we learned so little after 30 odd years? why do we still talk about "integration"? [Name any other social practice/organisation that talks in this way, i.e. when did we last read Banks to invest squillions integrating computers into their business? rant 1]
when will we notice that we keep on responding to each new bit of high tech stuff the same way we responded to each previous bit and to much the same effect? [the equivalent of little dot.com's going boom in education every 4-5 years: 1. new stuff, 2. quick we gotta respond and if we can't/don't then ban it, 3. why don't those &*^%$& teachers do something useful with it? 4. wait up there is some new stuff, 5. we gotta respond and quick, maybe a new literacy?, 6. drat those resisting teachers and wait up - those damn teacher educators also, 7. hey...did you see this new cool stuff...8. ...]
and skool keeps on being skool, merrily reproducing all the ugly patterns it has become so good at reproducing over the years. The interesting question here is why hasn't it changed when the rest of the planet has? [rant 2, for the most part we use rather silly theories of change - let's play the category game again, i.e. he/she/it is a neo-quasi-semi-would-be adoptee with reversionary tendencies; and we have pretty limited ways of thinking about technologies -a dangerous combination]
which, with lots of dots unjoined gets to the most interesting question, given all the limitations what use of computing and related technologies in schools makes sense right now? [hint more of the same is not the right answer]
arti -- fabulous suggestion, as usual.
Kelly -- I agree with your suggestion about focusing on teachers "in the middle." If they've made it five years in the profession chances are they'll stick around and are ready to explore their practice from new perspectives (at least that's what the research portends). I'm seeing a number of new profs at my uni come in a lot more web savvy, so I am still holding on to hope!
Carolyn -- you raise a number of wonderful points. I especially like your question re: k-12 teachers presenting at higher ed conferences. I am skipping this years major higher ed conference (AERA) and am really being picky about the conferences I attend and present at. I agree, sometimes I feel there's not enough connectivity between those who study teaching and those who practice it. My teacher education colleagues at UF (my uni) really do spend hours and hours each week working with schools and teachers within several local districts. They are really inspiring people to work with and I have learned much more in school settings than merely talking about them.
Larry -- you make an excellent point about acquiring the resources to support technology integration. This reminds me of the policy/practice disconnect that often comes with unfunded legislative mandates. Like you say, sometimes it takes a while to get things rolling. Like most things worth having in life, patience is key.
CJ -- boy! you nailed it! it does get kinda old asking these same questions over and over. I understand change takes time, but schools really seem to be the last bastion of change (and I thought it took time to get equipment upgrades when I was in the Army!). Like yourself, I certainly have more questions than answers which gets kind of frustrating when you know the resources are out there, right at your fingertips. I was talking to a colleague recently about using some of the grant money she has to not only train educators but to pay for a lobbyist to shake the legislative tree to get schools the resources they need to keep up. It's a never ending story, no?
Boy, am I going to sound bitter! There is immense resistance among educational professionals at many levels about learning how to teach using the computer and the web. I am very knowledgable about academic writing, business writing, communication, presenting, web 2.0, and curriculum development. I received the 2001 annual teaching award from the college I used to work at and have a Ph.D. in Education (2004) with a focus on becoming more web literate in teaching writing. I think I should be golden, but I'm not.
I left my college because new regulations put me in a silo where I coudn't teach writing or web applications. I've been teaching at university part time but would like to teach more than two courses a year. I have the best of the old in terms of my English (writing and speaking) knowledge and teaching experience, and great strength in my theoretical studies and eduweb explorations, but I struggle to find teaching work.
Writing programs don't seem to want web-oriented teachers, and educational courses focus on the discipline and background experience - I taught in a college not in elementary or secondary schools.
My belief, when I teach using what is freely available on the web, is that I am contributing to my students' futures. I embed experience using the web and Word into the curriculum, using these communication tools in a way that prepares students for their professional, not simply recreational, future use. I don't "teach" web 2.0 applications; I simply mandate their use, the same way teachers in a pre-computer era demanded good penmanship and library skills. And I don't use web applications simply because they are "trendy"; I use them because they contribute directly to student learning.
Blogging is discussion and journalling combined and shared not just with the teacher, but with peers. Wikis replace paper and support class communication in a way previously impossible. Using del.icio.us and zotero, knowing how to research online, knowing how to use Styles in Word for writing papers, these are all basics in this new communication age.
I simply don't understand why other teachers aren't doing the same, and why it is a struggle to to get teaching work using these tools.
We have to stop thinking of it as integration and start thinking of it as teaching in the 21st Century. At what point did we stop thinking of the whiteboard as new technology and it became simply a medium through which we communicated to our classes.
Not sure I agree with preservice teachers not being part of the solution. If Ingersol is right and 1/3 of the teaching force is retiring or leaving, then these bright idealist could truly become the tipping point for true educational reform. What I have noticed is this--
1. Who we think of when we think of netgenrs are not showing up in my ICT education courses. It is as if we draw the technophobic/resistent to education.
2. However, when they spend a semester in a virtual community with tech savvy minds from the blogosohere, when they start blogging for deep reflection based on what they are reading in their content classes and in the edublogosphere, when they start co-creating the syllabus and direction of the class and actually start using the tools and planning for the kids to use the tools to create and collaborate in their lessons--something happens. A light comes on and they see kids getting totally turned on by learning. Then they become true advocates.
My last few weeks are spent showing them how even as novices entering the workforce they can be teacher leaders. That teacher leadership is when you have an expertise to bring that can help other teachers- help their students achieve. That their expertise in 21st Century teaching skills makes them teacher leaders by default and advocates for children. By cultivating an attitude of advocacy early on, these fresh minds who can still remember why they went into teaching- "want to change the world and help kids"- are bold in advocating for using knowledge management tools, adaptive expertise, modeling connectivism, and being ok with the messy side of change.
I do think we need to be breathing life into mid-career teachers as well, but I place my money on those who havent been tainted by the system or jaded by disempowerment- as being the real power behind educational reform.
Now-- we really need to focus on teacher prep programs -- cant wait to read Linda's new book, thanks for sharing.
<a href="http://21stcenturylearning.typepad.com">Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach</a>
I agree, I think we accept excuses.
the message does not need changing, the delivery of the message needs changing.
www.tinyurl.com/vp9ta