Effective Teaching, Quality Instruction and Professional Development: December 2007

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Madden, M. (2006). PEW Internet project data memo: Podcast downloading. Available online at http://pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Podcasting.pdf

Rainie, L., & Madden, M. (2005). PEW Internet and American life project: Data memo: Podcasting. Available online at http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_podcasting2005.pdf

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

Professional development and training: Context and definitions

Professional development, within the context of higher education, focuses on improvement as teachers and is more pedagogical in content and structure (Fleming, Shire, Jones, Pill and McNamee, 2004). Training is, by design, focused on software and hardware competencies (McCarthy, 2006).

It is important to remember that the development of technological literacy and competence, while important and pivotal to a technology plan, is perhaps crucial to the offering of professional development and training (Clark, 1989). The plan focuses, primarily, on the technology and technological infrastructure, and other associated topics. However global any plan is by design, it is equally as important to decide what technology will be adopted as it is to offer training to use the technology.

The plan provides support for technology (Masi and Winer, 2005), and should provide technology support on an ongoing basis. In this instance, the goal of development is to improve “performance on the part of students, staff, and the organization” (Sparks, 1995, p. 2). Regardless of the label of professional development, staff development or training, the goal should be to improve teaching and learning.

Clark, K. (1989). What strategy can do for technology. Harvard Business Review 67(6), 94-98.

Fleming, S., Shire, J., Jones, D., Pill, A., & McNamee, M. (2004). Continuing professional development: Suggestions for effective practice. Journal of Further and Higher Education 28(2), 165-177.

Masi, A., & Winer, L. (2005). A university wide vision of teaching and learning with information technologies. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 42(2), 147-155.

McCarthy, E. (2006). When teachers take staff development personally. Education Digest 71(7), 45-49.

Sparks, D. (1995). A paradigm shift in staff development. In ERIC Review: Professional development 3(3), 2-4. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No: ED381136). Retrieved March 31, 2007 from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/25/d6/a1.pdf.

Integration of technology in teaching and learning

Integrating technology into the classroom environment presupposes many elements. First, that those who operate the technology have been trained, that the technology is present and functional and that the technology is appropriate for the teacher, the students and the course or curriculum (Cafolla and Knee, 1995). However each of these elements is addressed, it is still more important to determine that “technology in education [is] a fundamental part of the teaching, learning, assessment, evaluation, and productivity process” (Hoadley, Engelking and Bright, 1995, p. 410). Even with this pedagogical perspective, Cafolla and Knee mentioned that “the effects of leadership, particularly modeling” (Cafolla and Knee, 1995, p. 556) are one of the primary impediments or obstacles to successful technology integration in an educational setting.

The technology available, whether for classroom use or online use, changes teaching and learning (Grementieri, 1998). The change in teaching and learning may impact integration and this may be influenced by training (Cafolla and Knee, 1995; Grementieri, 1998). A successful training program supported by leadership provides the institutional support necessary for the potential of integration (Berger, 2005). As an advocate both for technology and of technology, leaders can create the environment where end users feel safe in using technology and encouraged to integrate technology in the classroom (Cafolla and Knee, 1995).

Training and advocacy are both elements of social change (Frank, Zhao and Borman, 2004). Through training, individuals are empowered with knowledge and skills. Advocates both recognize and respond to the need for training. Advocates become the primary agents for social change (Cafolla and Knee, 1995; Frank, Zhao and Borman, 2004).

Berger, J. (2005). Perceived consequences of adopting the internet into adult literacy and basic education classrooms. Adult Basic Education 15(2), 103-121.

Cafolla, R., & Knee, R. (1995). Factors limiting technology integration in education: The leadership gap. In D. Willis (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, San Antonio, Texas, March 22-25, 1995 (556-560). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED381148).

Frank, K., Zhao, Y., & Borman, K. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: The case of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education 77(2), 148-171.

Grementieri, V. (1998). Innovation technology and higher education. Higher Education in Europe 23(2), 169-175.

Hoadley, M., Engelking, J., & Bright, L. (1995). A model for technology infusion in higher education. In D. Willis (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, San Antonio, Texas, March 22-25, 1995 (410-413). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED381148).