BEST PRACTICES FOR ADMINISTRATORS: SUPPORTING TEACHERS IN ADOPTING TECHNOLOGY

BEST PRACTICES FOR ADMINISTRATORS: SUPPORTING TEACHERS IN ADOPTING TECHNOLOGY

Kim PeacockB.Ed, M.Ed

April 15, 2009

WHY ME? “I think the group would be more into gaining

ideas as to how to encourage and support the culture shift with technology becoming the way of doing things while still maintaining quality pedagogy.” – Carolyn Jensen

FWIW

THINGS YOU PROBABLY ALREADY KNOW Change should be systemic. Change should be non-negotiable. Change needs to be championed. Change should be planned concretely.

THE RESISTANT TEACHER Female In her 50s Elementary

COMMON COMPLAINTS The four most common reasons teachers cite

for not using technology are lack of: time, access, resources, and support.

RESISTING CHANGE: ACHIEVEMENT If we look beyond achievement, technology

has been to shown to have measurable impacts on things like: motivation, skills and “hidden curriculum”.

We have measured outcomes of technology on achievement by ALL teachers, not those who are doing it well.

RESISTING CHANGE: ACHIEVEMENT We have traditionally had curriculum

documents that work predominantly at the bottom two or three levels of bloom's taxonomy (and are assessed at that level).

Luckily, those curriculum documents are evolving.

SOME THEORY...

EVOLVING VIEWS OF INTEGRATION Past: “Technology is a tool that can be used

the same as any other tool in your teaching arsenal.”

Present: “Technology is a tool directly impacts how we interact with knowledge, curriculum content and our pedagogical practices.”

THE TPACK FRAMEWORK

http://www.tpck.org

TPACK “Technological Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (TPACK) attempts to capture some of the essential qualities of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge. At the heart of the TPACK framework, is the complex interplay of three primary forms of knowledge: Content (CK), Pedagogy (PK), and Technology (TK).

The TPACK approach goes beyond seeing these three knowledge bases in isolation. On the other hand, it emphasizes the new kinds of knowledge that lie at the intersections between them. Considering P and C together we get Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Shulman’s idea of knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content.

Similarly, considering T and C taken together, we get Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), the knowledge of the relationship between technology and content. At the intersection of T and P, is Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), which emphasizes the existence, components and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in the settings of teaching and learning.

Finally, at the intersection of all three elements is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator).

Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components.”

From: http://www.tpck.org (Koehler and Mishra)

THE TPACK FRAMEWORK

http://www.tpck.org

TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE (TK) Does the tool do all that I think it can? Does the tool do all that I need it to? Is the tool simple enough for students to use?

PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE (PK) Are the tasks well suited to my outcomes? Are the tasks well suited to my learners? Are the tasks unclear in any way? Does the sequencing of the tasks make

sense?

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CK) Do the students have all of the information

they need to complete the task? Do the students need any scaffolding I hadn’t

anticipated? Do the students have the necessary content

skills needed to complete the task?

PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (PCK) Are the pedagogical strategies of the tasks

appropriate for the types of activities (products or performances)?

Are there other strategies that I may not use as often (or be as comfortable with), but that might be more appropriate for this task?

TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE (TPK) Does the tool that I chose fit the type of task

that I wanted to do? Is there another tool that might be better

suited to this type of task? Does the tool make sense in terms of the

diverse learners in my classroom?

TECHNOLOGY CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TCK) Are there ways that the technology can bring

new content knowledge to my students in ways that couldn’t be done without it?

TECHNOLOGY PEDAGOGY CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPCK) Is this activity well balanced? Does it tend to lean more towards one of the

TPCK factors? What are my skills in the three areas? Do I

need to “brush up” or learn anything?

BACK TO REALITY...

PLANNING FOR CHANGE #1: Communicate your vision for change

clearly, concretely and frequently.

Get the word out. Get your students and parents excited about it

too. “Peer pressure” can be positive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RE098zoe7M

PLANNING FOR CHANGE #2: Make sure your teachers are

INSPIRED first.

Teachers don’t know what they don’t know. They can’t make pedagogical connections

without knowing what’s possible.

PLANNING FOR CHANGE #3: Require that one goal in every

teacher’s PD plan is a MEASURABLE goal involving technology.

Consumer vs. creator Evolutionary process For some, United Streaming will be a big step Be conscious of celebrating the consumers as

much as the creators

PLANNING FOR CHANGE #4: At the evaluation point for the PD

plans, have teachers decide: extinction or evolution.

Gently move them from being consumers to creators.

View it as a 3 (or 5) year cycle. If they choose extinction, make sure there are

PEDAGOGICAL or PRACTICAL reasons why.

PLANNING FOR CHANGE #5: Re-think the role of your school

technology coordinator.

You can get training elsewhere. You need someone to investigate innovation,

facilitate PD, promote collaboration, and participate in co-teaching and other forms of mentoring and coaching.

Fight the concept of that person as "the techie teacher” as if it’s a blessing from above.

IMPLEMENTING CHANGE #6: Have teachers choose a technology

to champion.

Have them be the “resident expert”. Work on a one or three year cycle of learn, try,

share. Give them the option to be alone or in groups.

IMPLEMENTING CHANGE #7: If you feel your teachers can handle

it, have them develop one technology focused project a year.

Small or large. Can work in grade levels and/or subject levels. Make sure it’s an expectation for all. Make sure it will be displayed in some

capacity.

IMPLEMENTING CHANGE #8: If you don’t have a critical mass of

technology, bite the bullet and buy it.

Overhaul then maintain your infrastructure. Slow roll-outs can be frustrating: you can’t

require something that only half can do. Demonstrate equipment, feature it at staff

meetings. User-test minor equipment purchases.

IMPLEMENTING CHANGE #9: Engage your stakeholders.

Solicit parental involvement in tech initiatives (e.g., blog responses).

Bring your stakeholders to your showcase using things like your newsletter, emails, etc...

Have a web presence. Consider web 2.0 technologies.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT #10 - Focus on PD through co-planning

and co-teaching.

Have teachers buddy up on equal footing and/or mentor-mentee.

Use your school tech coordinator as a co-planner and co-teacher rather than “tech support”.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT #11: Make PD a regular part of staff

meetings (get technology working for you to save time).

PD should be REAL, not just online. PD should tie to curriculum, even if it’s just for

inspiration. PD should be SHORT and not focus on

training.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT #12: Make sure PD covers not only

pedagogical ideas, but pedagogical theory and practice as well.

Draw concrete links between technology and inquiry learning, constructivism, etc...

Draw concrete links between technology and media literacy.

Draw concrete links between technology use and real life issues and dilemmas.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT #13: Implement a student mentor

program for your tech savvy students.

Give kids training in PEDAGOGY and good instruction.

Make it an after-school club. Have them co-teach and co-plan with the

teachers.

SUSTAINING CHANGE #14: Celebrate your teachers’ progress

in a variety of ways.

Make sharing a regular part of every staff meeting.

Feature teachers and projects in the school newsletter.

Have a yearly “techno fair”. Have a school portfolio of student work. Celebrate teachers at EVERY level (consumers

and creators).

SUSTAINING CHANGE #15: Reward early adopters and

innovators.

Provide incentives for technology use and growth: Days off for PD (take or deliver) Special equipment for classrooms

BE AN INNOVATOR I1: Re-think how you address technology

on report cards.

Skills assessments? Portfolio only?

BE AN INNOVATOR I2: Rethink CTS and computer classes.

Focus less on skills and more on cross-curricular projects.

Integrate your CTS curriculum with core materials.

Assess them combined as well. http://www.youtube.com/user/hthvideo

THANK YOU! [email protected] http://www.protopage.com/web2point0fortea

chers